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

[waldojabba]

Raised Fireplace hearth seems the most obvious
Gym equipment

Selling because it reminds them of what happened there? Guilt factor?

@sapphire blue those were my choices too !

 

[keek]

I am so done listening to Brennan but I think this next cross will be interesting.

Dr R obviously much smarter in all of this than Brennan.
So Brennan will try to get under Dr. R's skin and have Dr R get off his details/lash back at him

Dr R has to be used to slimy lawyers at this point in his career but Hank's is a special kind of nasty.

Hank telling Dr R "over here" look at me like snapping his fingers - YIKES
I am not sure Dr R will abide with that.

JMO

Agree, Dr. will take of things of fact and science. IMO

 

[Seattle1]

When the Dr. is done with his testimony and leaves , his child will always remember his father wishing him Happy Birthday and the father as well. Children first. Nothing was interfered with in his testimony. Values. IMO

Whereas Dr. R was not even allowed to finish his sentence before the Court abruptly sustained the CW's objection, Dr. W was allowed to editorialize with his personal story about how his father discouraged him from attending medical school. It's going to be a long day... JMO

 

[Greenestdays]

Speaking of, how do we make sense of the discrepancy between abrasions and sweatshirt holes?

Someone help me

How might this be explained?

It’s possible to get abrasions without damage to clothing. Depends on the material(s) and how sharp the damaging object is. I’ve had dogs hurt my legs/arms (when playing) with their claws, cuts and abrasions from sharp twigs (when hiking) etc. with no clothing tears.

 

[ShadyLady]

Right - it's a circumstantial case where the broad sweep of evidence is highly incriminating.

It's not seriously denied anymore that Karen drove 24mph in reverse or seriously contended she broke her tail light at 1 meadows.

The defence wants to engage in a form of circular reasoning whereby one can assume the ultimate answer (no collision) and thus sweep aside all the circumstantial evidence to the contrary. The basis for this is a bunch of people they hired to say it.

Rentschler for me is by far the best defence witness. But he is severely hindered because Wolfe already demonstrated an accident that looks a lot like the one alleged. Is it exactly the same? Or course not - because we can never know all those variables.

IMO

"it's a circumstantial case where the broad sweep of evidence is highly incriminating."

You are right....highly incriminating that LE planted evidence, and prosecution lied about testimony.

 

[missy1974]

Ah, ok that makes sense.

Reminds me I don't ever want to make a dog too angry

I don't have much experience with aggressive dogs, but I do with little pups that have sharp teeth and claws

It is really easy to picture this IMO even thinking of my dog with a toy... and playing tug of war ... she holds the toy, I try to pull it away... sometimes she will let go quick and adjust her grip on the toy, it's done so quickly, and I don't win the war. Very easy to picture how it could happen with an aggressive dog as someone is trying to pull away from them.

 

[nodamselindistress]

It’s possible to get abrasions without damage to clothing. Depends on the material(s) and how sharp the damaging object is. I’ve had dogs hurt my legs/arms (when playing) with their claws, cuts and abrasions from sharp twigs (when hiking) etc. with no clothing tears.

Absolutely true! A few months ago, my dog and I were running across the street and she ran in front of me and tripped me, I fell on my knees and one knee totally skinned up but no tears in my pants.

 

[cocomod]

What I am saying is as a practical matter, if the Juror does not believe that to be the case, it is inevitable they must conclude it was broken during the high speed reversing, as no other evidence is before them. Especially the jury should not speculate into existence some other explanation(s) for how it was broken that the defence has not claimed. There really are only two possibilities here, and the defendant knows which version is correct.

RSBM

It doesn't conclude that she hit him. What if she did a 3 point turn a block from the house because she went the wrong direction to go home, did a quick 3 point turn to head back in the right direction, and hit another car on the side of the road. A broken taillight doesn't prove she hit him with her vehicle.

 

[Angelwatch]

Right - it's a circumstantial case where the broad sweep of evidence is highly incriminating.

It's not seriously denied anymore that Karen drove 24mph in reverse or seriously contended she broke her tail light at 1 meadows.

The defence wants to engage in a form of circular reasoning whereby one can assume the ultimate answer (no collision) and thus sweep aside all the circumstantial evidence to the contrary. The basis for this is a bunch of people they hired to say it.

Rentschler for me is by far the best defence witness. But he is severely hindered because Wolfe already demonstrated an accident that looks a lot like the one alleged. Is it exactly the same? Or course not - because we can never know all those variables.

IMO

A medical examiner’s report is direct evidence. Three medical examiners testified he wasn’t hit by a vehicle. There’s much beyond circumstantial evidence in the defense of Karen Read.

 

[arielilane]

• KR admitted being angry with John. She’s extremely intoxicated.
  • Digital data (GPS and Apple Health Data) are clear that John did not go inside 34F.
  • John got out of the Lexus
  • The Lexus pulled forward
  • Backup maneuver (53 ft) occurred between 12:32:04 AM and 12:32:12 AM
  • 74% throttle hitting John
  • John's (Apple Health Data) locked at 12:32:09
    • Broken taillight (its possible to break taillight - courtesy of defense team via RR)
    • John’s injuries are consistent with being struck by Lexus, hitting hard ground.
    • She said "I know I said, I hit him.”
    • The Karen clips: self explanatory.
    • At the February 2, 2022, bond hearing attorney DY advised: my client KR had no criminal intent, it was an accident.
    • In addition, KR herself told media: I asked David, 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.
  • And... to avoid culpability she hasn't stopped blaming everybody and anybody. Takes no accountability.

My own opinion as well as court testimony and news articles

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

• KR admitted being angry with John. She’s extremely intoxicated.
  • Digital data (GPS and Apple Health Data) are clear that John did not go inside 34F.
  • John got out of the Lexus
  • The Lexus pulled forward
  • Backup maneuver (53 ft) occurred between 12:32:04 AM and 12:32:12 AM
  • 74% throttle hitting John
  • John's (Apple Health Data) locked at 12:32:09
    • Broken taillight (its possible to break taillight - courtesy of defense team via RR)
    • John’s injuries are consistent with being struck by Lexus, hitting hard ground.
    • She said "I know I said, I hit him.”
    • The Karen clips: self explanatory.
    • At the February 2, 2022, bond hearing attorney DY advised: my client KR had no criminal intent, it was an accident.
    • In addition, KR herself told media: I asked David, 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.
  • And... to avoid culpability she hasn't stopped blaming everybody and anybody. Takes no accountability.

My own opinion as well as court testimony and news articles

Please provide a link where it was testified that "John's injuries are consistent with being stuck by Lexus". <modsnip: unnecessary> TIA,.

 

[Anniesflowers]

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

Thank you, Sgt. Barros!!

 

[missy1974]

It doesn't conclude that she hit him. What if she did a 3 point turn a block from the house because she went the wrong direction to go home, did a quick 3 point turn to head back in the right direction, and hit another car on the side of the road. A broken taillight doesn't prove she hit him with her vehicle.

The jury does have evidence of another bump.. in the driveway... Welcher says it couldn't have happened... do they believe Welcher? Do they believe Barros? Barros said the light had a break about the size of a dollar bill in it. He stood by the SUV for a long period of time before it was loaded on to the towtruck.

The pictures/videos entered into evidence showing the tail light are HIGHLY disputed, obviously not everyone sees it the same, and I would guess that the percentage of people that believe they do not see the extensive damage is much higher than the percentage that do. IMO

One question that has not been answered in the trial and I wish it was... the diffuser was badly damaged (which ARCCA did not see even in the full on 29 mph test), what would the light look like lit up with the diffuser damaged as bad as KR's?

 

[ShadyLady]

Please provide a link where it was testified that "John's injuries are consistent with being stuck by Lexus". This is a complete fabrication as nobody has testified to that. TIA,.

AND this is false too:

"Digital data (GPS and Apple Health Data) are clear that John did not go inside 34F."

 

[missy1974]

Brennan coming out strong... lol

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1932788920812552667

Dr. Andrew Rentschler (ARCCA biomechanist) is back on the stand for more direct examination from Alan Jackson. #WBZ


6:17 AM · Jun 11, 2025

3 minutes into direct, the lawyers are at sidebar with the Judge. Brennan has made repeated objections to questions about why ARCCA was reviewing Aperture's testing. #WBZ

https://twitter.com/x/status/1932788920812552667

6:21 AM · Jun 11, 2025

Rentschler testifies that paint test by Aperture was not done scientifically, and that O'Keefe's arm abrasions don't go the direction they would have from broken tail light. #WBZ


7:25 AM · Jun 11, 2025

Rentschler testifies that O'Keefe's arm injuries (lack of broken bones) are not consistent with car strike, that the physics of how he would have been thrown don't comport with his point of final rest. #WBZ


8:18 AM · Jun 11, 2025

Rentschler is done for direct examination. Morning recess until 11:50ish. Then he'll be back for cross examination from Hank Brennan. #WBZ


8:29 AM · Jun 11, 2025

 

[Anniesflowers]

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

A ~6” x 2.5” piece was missing. I saw the video that corroborated Sgt. Barros’ testimony. She hit JOK’s car when backing out of the garage. All on video. IMO.

 

[cocomod]

We need to realize that the sweatshirt would have and did protect OJO's arm to a degree. It didn't prevent the dog bite, but it slowed the ability of the dog to cut in to the skin. This is why the abrasions were not as deep as if the dog had bit a bare arm. That is also part of the reason why the teeth scraped against the arm as he likely pulled away from the bite or an owner was pulling on the dog to stop the attack.

The CW's case is hinging on a side-swipe by the car on OJO's arm at a 90 degree angle while he was hit at a high rate of speed. This would have moved his shoulder and elbow at a high rate of speed which would have likely dislocated his shoulder or his elbow. No bruising, no breaks of the bones, no evidence he was hit at a high rate of speed by a vehicle.

The only glass found at the scene the morning he was found was clear glass from a drinking glass. So, if a piece of that cup was in his nose, it still has nothing to do with the taillight. I can see what the doctor was saying yesterday that it was not a sharp wound (like a knife).

Clear glass was found in the snow in the early morning with a snow blower. No red taillight was found at that time which makes NO sense. The red glass was found later after there was a LOT more snow?! Make it make sense!

 

[kuromiiiilove]

• KR admitted being angry with John. She’s extremely intoxicated.
  • Digital data (GPS and Apple Health Data) are clear that John did not go inside 34F.
  • John got out of the Lexus
  • The Lexus pulled forward
  • Backup maneuver (53 ft) occurred between 12:32:04 AM and 12:32:12 AM
  • 74% throttle hitting John
  • John's (Apple Health Data) locked at 12:32:09
    • Broken taillight (its possible to break taillight - courtesy of defense team via RR)
    • John’s injuries are consistent with being struck by Lexus, hitting hard ground.
    • She said "I know I said, I hit him.”
    • The Karen clips: self explanatory.
    • At the February 2, 2022, bond hearing attorney DY advised: my client KR had no criminal intent, it was an accident.
    • In addition, KR herself told media: I asked David, 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.
  • And... to avoid culpability she hasn't stopped blaming everybody and anybody. Takes no accountability.

My own opinion as well as court testimony and news articles

Parroting prosecution bullet points doesn't turn theory into fact. MOO

 

[Anniesflowers]

Rentschler.

Not a likeable witness.......if I was on the jury.
Won't just answer the question but feels he needs to "add-on" to every answer.

Can't blame the CW for the multiple objections and I agree with the Judge on sustaining most of them.

You don’t have to like him to find his testimony credible. Personally, I enjoy listening to him speak.