VERDICT WATCH MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #35 Retrial

[lohrtabitha]

I agree the size of the suggested conspiracy seems unsustainable, but I believe someone called in a tip is how the Alberts began to be suspected?

The drama motive with BH seems weak to me.

I could see murder if JOK discovered some kind of corruption within Canton LE. The problem is where he was found- why would a group conspiring to get rid of him leave him in the front yard?

Several people are at least guilty of a coverup, but I’m not convinced an attack was intentional.

IMO

To frame the snow plow driver. Tons of pedestrians get killed by plows in the New England states every year. It is also why Lucky testified that he is super careful. He doesn't want to hit people or animals. Imo

 

[Forest_Wood]

I see it this way
Because Higgins has no family/ All of LE is his family
And Chief Berkowitz was his bestie maybe even a father figure
I think he would eat his gun before turning on his "family"
I believe - if he did enter rehab-
Remember he spoke to LE at his lawyer's office on the south shore a few days after incident - it was on advice of the same lawyer in order to save his job. Easy peasy - claim addiction ( which the guy was/is a mess so believable), which is considered a disease and he would not be able to be fired for his actions -whatever those actions were.
JMO

Brian Higgins was (is?) definitely an alcoholic! All he did was think about, talk about and wanted to see pics of alcohol. He drank any chance he could get, daily.
I'm still not clear on what the FBI were investigating, but BH I imagine was one of the main individuals they had their eye on due to the defense bringing to light so much with this investigation. I imagine because he had a lawyer and was being investigated, someone must have advised him to seek help for his addiction to alcohol. He may have went to rehab but I would guess he'd have a hard time staying sober long-term. It might take him many trips to rehab before he stepped out of his denial system so entrenched in him.
I didn't know he spoke to his lawyer just days after this incident!
MOO

 

[Hazelnutty]

Another random question of the day:

What was your first AHA moment when you looked at this case and felt she was not guilty?

For me - it was the photo of JOKs arm. The moment I first saw it I said that those were absolutely from a dog attack. And then from there, so many other AHA moments came about. But I initially thought she was guilty until I saw that arm.

For me it was finding out the homeowners didn't come outside with the responders. They didn't notice the lights and noise ?
+ they didn't go to jok funeral.

The butt dials. The answering of the butt dials and the returning of butt dial calls-- with no memory of how, why, when...

His arm. His body temp being 80°.

I had lots of A-ha! moments.

 

[Leilei]

How would he be interacting with his phone and walk if he had a bar glass in his hand?
What would he do if he stopped to pee on those trees? Where would the phone go? And the bar glass? Can the fly be done with one hand?
Would he put the phone in his back pocket?
I’m asking…

IMO

Respectfully, there has been zero evidence that JOK stopped to pee on any foliage at Fairview, and seeing it brought up many times over the past few days is just a little extreme.
IMO.

 

[HarmonyE.]

Respectfully, there has been zero evidence that JOK stopped to pee on any foliage at Fairview, and seeing it brought up many times over the past few days is just a little extreme.
IMO.

Seriously. I'm pretty sure they had a few bathrooms in the house he was planning on entering.

 

[Anniesflowers]

I asked this question in a post yesterday, but it was during testimony, and the thread was moving quickly. So it went unanswered, which is understandable. I'm more or less copying it from my earlier post:

I think early in this trial it was testified, perhaps by the cell phone data witness, that KR tried to call her parents at least three times in the hours after she returned to John's house. Has it been testified as to why a 40ish year old woman would call her elderly parents in the wee hours of the night after returning home very drunk after she dropped her boyfriend off at a friend's house? Was she very troubled about something? Maybe she kept thinking, "Did I hit him? I think I may have hit him! Should I go back to see if I hit him? Let me call daddy, he'll tell me what to do!"? Does anyone know anything else about these calls? Or have an opinion as to why she would make them? This is a question I keep coming back to when trying to make up my mind about the case.

This is moo. She called home twice. The first time was to her Mom at around 1:15, which went unanswered. I think this call was to talk about how upset she was with John. At that point, she thought he ditched her at 34F and was possibly with another woman. She may have called her Mom to vent, or for reassurance he wasn’t cheating. The second time, she called her Dad at 6:30 am to tell him JOK had passed away.

My parents are 78, almost 79, and neither I nor my 3 sisters would hesitate to call them in the middle of the night if I felt I needed them. My parents wouldn’t hesitate to call any of us in the middle of the night, if they needed us. We’re a pretty close family and support each other that way. Would I call my Mom at 1:30 to vent about a fight with my husband? Nope, but that has no bearing on what KR would do. We have no idea their relationship and can’t decide that for someone else.

Some folks, imo, believe she did it because she wondered if she may have hit him; or because of what she said in the documentary; or because she left awful text messages for her boyfriend; or because she had crazy eyes (I actually read that on X). Based on text messages between her and John, it seemed as though they could bring out the worst in each other. I’m sure the drinking on both sides contributed to their toxicity, but I do believe they loved each other, and she loved those children.

I’m firmly on the NG side, as I’m sure you can tell. It was the science that convinced me. The hard science does not show John suffered from a vehicle strike. The soft science explains why she was questioning herself about her potential involvement. Dr. Russell told us that it was an acute grief reaction. She saw it many, many times when dealing with families as an ER doctor. Anything else is just noise, imo.

 

[Amber29]

Funny how KR reaching out to a DUI lawyer is considered by some to make her look guilty, but BH doing that is not?

Not that I don't agree with it, because I think that we should never speak to the police without a lawyer, guilty or innocent. I blame following so many cases over the years haha LE can do shady stuff.. and your words really can be used against you. JMO

Agreed! I follow way too much true crime. If makes me look guilty to lawyer up then so be it, it’s the smartest thing anyone can do. May save you freedom and your life. The fact that cops can lie to you when questioning you tells me all I need to know. I respect the police and have a trust in them but not if I could be accused of a crime.

 

[turaj]

it's obvious she is close to her parents. Remember when she was texting with BH, she said something along the lines of 'my parents think I would feel differently if they were my sister's kids', so she talked to them about the issues going on and her feelings. Would not surprise me that she called them ticked off about John partying while she was at his house "babysitting"... then calling again in a panic when she woke up and he wasn't home yet and didn't know what to do. She didn't even have JMc's phone number. JMO

it has been discussed that they were not that excited about her becoming caregiver to these children...I think she complained to them about it. I agree not happy that John was out all night and she is expected to be there with the children.

 

[keek]

it has been discussed that they were not that excited about her becoming caregiver to these children...I think she complained to them about it. I agree not happy that John was out all night and she is expected to be there with the children.

She would be their concern out of all. They have the life experience of seeing being involved (with the kids) emotionally etc, then the relationship doesn't work out most likely, and that upset and loss. Which has happened suddenly. The saw that neither planned on a life commitment at that time as KR has said, but. They knew their daughter. It is not a bad thing. She probably felt overwhelmed and def. responsible for them when JOK out, and just..floating around. Human feelings, emotions, reality all that for anyone as time went on.

 

[Seattle1]

In comparing the actual verdict slip above provided for Karen Read's first trial, compared to the sample verdict slip below (dated Oct 2024), the later sample makes it clear for Jurors to select only one of the four choices 1-4, and that selecting "Not Guilty" applies to the offense charged, and any lesser included offense.

IMO, the Common Wealth revised the verdict slip for a very valid reason!

And now we wait to learn whether or not Judge Cannone will use the newer verdict slip, or again insist it's her way or the highway.

https://www.mass.gov/doc/5501-sample-jury-verdict-slip-oui-causing-serious-injury/download

 

[ShadyLady]

Seriously. I'm pretty sure they had a few bathrooms in the house he was planning on entering.

Guy that does not wear shoes in the house, I dont see peeing in the grass before he visits friends...

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1933283871182753833

I'm no fan of TB but I do find it sad that this Court banned a journalist from being present on any date certain individuals were present because they were allegedly intimidated by him.

Seems a Judge (3-day bench trial) determined two of these individuals conspired with TB's former GF in Jan 2024 to keep TB from attending the trial and then tried to send him back to jail within days of his release (for violating a PCO). He never went to jail, and today was found not guilty of violating the restraining order.

IMO, this seems to follow the CW's best effort to indict KR on witness intimidation charges --desperate to mirror her to TB's case but the grand jury wasn't having it. Seems Hank B was especially interested in the trial's outcome -- and was reportedly attending via Zoom.

 

[mrjitty]

View attachment 594780

In comparing the actual verdict slip above provided for Karen Read's first trial, compared to the sample verdict slip below (dated Oct 2024), the later sample makes it clear for Jurors to select only one of the four choices 1-4, and that selecting "Not Guilty" applies to the offense charged, and any lesser included offense.

IMO, the Common Wealth revised the verdict slip for a very valid reason!

And now we wait to learn whether or not Judge Cannone will use the newer verdict slip, or again insist it's her way or the highway.

View attachment 594782

https://www.mass.gov/doc/5501-sample-jury-verdict-slip-oui-causing-serious-injury/download

Thanks Seattle

So this would appear to demonstrate the Judge did in fact use the model form for Trial 1 as it existed at the time.

Presumably she will use the updated model form as it now stands as at the Oct 2024 update.

I realise we disagree on this, but my point all along has been the Judge didn't do anything nefarious or unexpected here. The model forms are created by committee for a reason and reflect appellate litigation.

I hope we can at least put to bed any suggestion the Judge came up with some dodgy form herself!

MOO

 

[jepop]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1933283871182753833

I'm no fan of TB but I do find it sad that this Court banned a journalist from being present on any date certain individuals were present because they were allegedly intimidated by him.

Seems a Judge (3-day bench trial) determined two of these individuals conspired with TB's former GF in Jan 2024 to keep TB from attending the trial and then tried to send him back to jail within days of his release (for violating a PCO). He never went to jail, and today was found not guilty of violating the restraining order.

IMO, this seems to follow the CW's best effort to indict KR on witness intimidation charges --desperate to mirror her to TB's case but the grand jury wasn't having it. Seems Hank B was especially interested in the trial's outcome -- and was reportedly attending via Zoom.

Ah, that it explains why Brennan spent the entire morning in court yesterday staring into his laptop, while Lally did the menial work arguing for no change to the verdict slip, keeping Rentschler's informative and professionally produced slide from being accessible to the jury during deliberations, and finally arguing against Alessi for a reasonable curative instruction to counter Brennan's own misleading of the jury using the plexi glassed hoodie. Moo

On this last point I am becoming more curious about why Brennan wanted the hoodie laid out under plexi glass for this trial, like some kind of macabre museum piece, in the first place. I may go back and see if I can find anything on the origins of that. Jmo

 

[Seattle1]

Thanks Seattle

So this would appear to demonstrate the Judge did in fact use the model form for Trial 1 as it existed at the time.

Presumably she will use the updated model form as it now stands as at the Oct 2024 update.

I realise we disagree on this, but my point all along has been the Judge didn't do anything nefarious or unexpected here. The model forms are created by committee for a reason and reflect appellate litigation.

I hope we can at least put to bed any suggestion the Judge came up with some dodgy form herself!

MOO

Actually, the model form used in trial 1 was probably just sloppy editing by somebody long ago who didn't want to format the page because "1. NOT GUILTY" should have always included the omitted words "... of Offense as charged and any lesser included Offense."

IMO, the rub was always that it did not read clearly from jump, judge was flippant when it was brought to her attention, and ultimately it was an issue for the jurors.

I'll be curious to see what example Yanetti provides the Court and what is finally issued to the jurors on Friday!

 

[mrjitty]

Actually, the model form used in trial 1 was probably just sloppy editing by somebody long ago who didn't want to format the page because "1. NOT GUILTY" should have always included the omitted words "... of Offense as charged and any lesser included Offense."

IMO, the rub was always that it did not read clearly from jump, judge was flippant when it was brought to her attention, and ultimately it was an issue for the jurors.

I'll be curious to see what example Yanetti provides the Court and what is finally issued to the jurors on Friday!

On that score, I suspect she is much more likely to listen to submissions from Yannetti who is familiar with local practice, models and patterns, than AJ who will be familiar with different models in his state. However it would also not surprise if she sticks with the updated model of Oct 2024, as it exists for a reason.

In any event, thank you for posting the model.

 

[Tortoise]

Ok, so why would they not be thinking “possible car accident” as you suggested above if it’s true that KR was running around hollering she hit him on repeat?

Wait a second! I thought they DID know what happened because Karen said “I hit him! I hit him! I hit him!” To so many people at the scene. You’d have figured they’d be looking for signs of a vehicle collision. Moo.

Saying "I hit him" meant she was running around saying she hit him with her car.... but wait... no, it doesn't... she never said car...

<RSBM>

JMO

Here's the witness testimony showing they didn't know a car was involved in John's death.

Katie McLaughlin, firefighter paramedic from timestamp 4.32.32

Q. When you were there trying to help the gentleman that was on the ground, did you know this would become a homicide investigation?

A. No.

Q. Did anybody tell you this was a homicide?

A. No.

Q. In fact when you spoke, when the defendant spoke to you, you were simply trying to get background information to help Mr O’Keefe? When she told you ‘I hit him, I hit him’ did she say that she hit him with something?

A. No

Q. Did you know whether it was with a fist or a foot?

A. No

Q. Or a Lexus?

A. No

Q. You mentioned this was not part of your role to investigate. Why didn’t you persist, why didn’t you follow up and ask more questions about that statement? What about the situation and the dynamics caused you not to ask the question?

Objection

Sustained as to that form

Q. Why didn’t you persist in getting more information from the defendant when she said I hit him I hit him?

A. I just, I felt bad for her at the time, it was a very disturbing scene and I did not want to push further down that road, it’s not my job and I didn’t feel comfortable doing it.



Lt Paul Gallagher (left 34 Fairview before 8 am, after uncovering drinking glass with leaf blower) from timestamp 5.56.24

Q. At this point did you have any position as you assessed the area whether this was a criminal investigation?

A. We had no crime at that time.

Q. When you were there were you looking for anything?

A. Yes, I was examining the scene.

Q. At that point did you have any reason to start a criminal investigation?

A. Not at that time, no.

Q. When you learned that Mr O’Keefe was found outside did you go look at the particular area?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you describe the area that was shown to you where Mr O’Keefe was found?

A. Sure, it was on the left side of the property of 34 Fairview. You could see where first responders and witnesses and police officers had walked up to the area. It was by a flagpole on the property line of no. 32 Fairview.

[...]

6.00.00

Q. When you were at the scene did you make a decision to do anything?

A. Yes

Q. What did you decide you were going to do?

A. Since the State police were not responding I decided to process the area where Mr O’Keefe was found and try to find out why he had the medical episode he was having.

Q. If you understood this to be a medical episode and at that point you didn’t have any information it was a crime scene why were you taking the time and effort to process the scene under these conditions?

A. Because that’s what we do. Even the hospital there could be a reason, there’s obviously a reason he’s there. I think we had a duty and obligation to check around his, where he was found and see if there was any explanation to what caused his medical condition.

Q. Did you focus on a particular area when you decided to look around?

A. I did.

A. What area were you going to look at?

A. Where it was pointed out he was found and where the blood pattern was.

Q. Were you thinking about looking in any other areas around that?

A. Not at that time.

Q. Why not?

A. We didn’t have any reason to, we only had the area where he was found.

Q. And at that point did you have any idea what caused his injuries?

A. We had none.

Q. At this point when you were pointed, or you were looking at the area where Mr O’Keefe was found, was the area getting covered up at all?

A. Yes it was.

Q. With what?

A. Snow.

Q. How quickly?

A. Very quickly. I believe the it was forecast that it came down 1-2 inches an hour if I recall.

Q. Did you have any idea how hard the ground was at that point?

Objection

Did you have any idea?

A. It was frozen.

Objection

I’ll allow it.

Q. How deep was the snow covering that frozen ground?

A. Approximately four inches at that time.

Q. When you went to look around the area did you consider using a rake or a shovel?

A. I did.

Q. And did you?

A. I did not.

Q. Why didn’t you use a shovel at that point?

A. I was afraid I would miss something or possibly break something.

Q. What could you break with a shovel?

A. Anything glass or anything of that nature.

Q. What was your decision about how you would search that area. What did you want to see?

A. I wanted to see anything that was possible, whether it was any type of weapon or any type of medical bottle or any reason that he could have come to where he was.

 

[Tortoise]

His body temp being 80°

RSBM

The defence expert Dr Laposata conceded under cross-examination that John's body temperature was consistent with him being outside all that time, even if he'd been alive for a couple of hours.

I believe the calculations were two hours unconscious losing heat at 1-2 degrees an hour, and four hours deceased, losing heat at about 4 degrees an hour. Total 18 degrees.

 

[anglolawyer]

There is no missing piece, if you mean never recovered.

The first 6-7 broken pieces were recovered by SERT team in the 5pm hour on the 29th outside 34F. The defence does not contest that recovery. The crime lab ended up reassembling much of Karen's tail light from the full recovery.

Given the uncontested reconstruction evidence that the defendant did not break the tail light reversing into the victim's Traverse at 1mph, the only conclusion available to the jury is she broke it at 34F at 12.32am which is my original point that started that discussion!

MOO

I forgot his name (Sgt. Burrows?) proved a piece was missing when the SUV was seized, about the size of a dollar bill. He noted damage to the tail light in his report. Where is that piece?

 

[anglolawyer]

Well, that was super-interesting. The defence moved yesterday for a beefed-up jury instruction on the hoodie business. They obviously aren’t satisfied with the modest one they got 1st time round & probably feel (rightly IMO) they dropped the ball when Brennan was pulling off his stunt with Wolf. Interestingly, the judge observed they didn’t object at the time & Alessi responded saying they couldn’t see properly while Brennan held the shirt up to the witness.

This excuse is inadequate IMO. They could have intervened to ask what he was showing but they didn’t. They were caught off guard & failed to react & the issue has clearly been gnawing away since.

I haven’t seen the ruling on the motion. Anyone better informed?