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 #36 Retrial

[kuromiiiilove]

“Probably accidentally hit him” and BARD are incompatible.

Exactly. Judge Cannone’s jury instruction were very clear on BARD.

 

[Soulmagent]

HE said it was parked in front of the mailbox in testimony.

I thought I even saw a diagram, maybe it was microdots? IMO.

 

[Wishbone]

I thought I even saw a diagram, maybe it was microdots? IMO.

Higgins said Albert issued an “open invitation” to the people at the bar to come back to his home on Fairview Road. When he arrived at the home, he said there was a “dusting” of snow on the ground, so he did a sweep through the driveway with his plow before parking by the mailbox.

Higgins said he was only at the home for a short period time, leaving between 12:30 and 1 a.m., and never saw O’Keefe or Read there. He said he texted O’Keefe asking where he was but never received a response.

Karen Read trial: Read kissed Brian Higgins 2 weeks before O’Keefe’s death

In bombshell testimony Friday, special agent Brian Higgins spoke about his romantic relationship with Karen Read in the weeks before her boyfriend's death.

www.masslive.com

 

[keek]

I thought I even saw a diagram, maybe it was microdots? IMO.

Microdots are incredible, the graphics and details.

 

[Soulmagent]

Higgins said Albert issued an “open invitation” to the people at the bar to come back to his home on Fairview Road. When he arrived at the home, he said there was a “dusting” of snow on the ground, so he did a sweep through the driveway with his plow before parking by the mailbox.

Higgins said he was only at the home for a short period time, leaving between 12:30 and 1 a.m., and never saw O’Keefe or Read there. He said he texted O’Keefe asking where he was but never received a response.

Karen Read trial: Read kissed Brian Higgins 2 weeks before O’Keefe’s death

In bombshell testimony Friday, special agent Brian Higgins spoke about his romantic relationship with Karen Read in the weeks before her boyfriend's death.

www.masslive.com

He did say all of that , in trial one.
The mistrial saved B Alberts and his puh-2d. IMO
That opens the invite -along with other members of the clans actions ,words an ,or behavior is a very legit thing to lay liability on IMO. I think it is why they took a 40,000 gran lose on the house. Math is probably not correct ,it might even have been more. Everything is IMO.

 

[lohrtabitha]

It's not supposition. It's in Ian Whiffin's testimony regarding John's cellphone location data when the Lexus came to a stop, and Ryan Nagel's testimony.

2.16.08

1.15.50

And Karen's own words:

Clip 17

[...] Like he’s he’s roughly where I left him so yeah when I found him I was thinking did I like clip him somehow.

2.04.16

It doesn't matter because there is no medical evidence testified to that John Okeefe was hit by a car. None.

 

[missy1974]

It doesn't matter because there is no medical evidence testified to that John Okeefe was hit by a car. None.

Ryan Nagel also didn't see anyone in the passenger seat. IIRC he said it a few times.

His ex-gf didn't see anyone in the passenger seat either.

 

[turaj]

the fact that so many here are thinking guilty (a surprise after closing) makes me think we could be in for another hung jury.

 

[AngTxGal]

Where the Lexus was when the alleged collision happened has not been proven in addition to so many other missing facts that have been discussed repeatedly. For myself, it comes down to evidence of a collision actually taking place. IMO the Lexus damage does not support that happening nor do the injuries to JO show he was hit by a car.

The Prosecution and The Defense have provided stories that attempt to link sets of facts,
Because of the small window of
Time and Location that all of the events appear to have happened.

These facts do not have to be related in a cause and effect manner to be true. There are many other facts that aren’t a part of the stories- so they are not mentioned.

KR Taillight cracked, or broken into 40+ pieces
KR dropped JOK off near the flagpole
KR and JOK had been drinking
KR and JOK argued
KR had been flirting with BH
JOK head injuries consistent with a fall backward and hit against a hard surface with a ledge
JOK found near flagpole near his removed shoe, cap, phone

These Don’t Work with The Conspiracy in the House Theory
JOK was found near the broken bar glass that was in his hand when he left KR’s car.
JOK doesn’t have wounds consistent with a fist fight
JOK found in the front yard of the cop that was supposed to be part of the coverup
No one claims to have seen JOK in the house
No one claims to have seen the dog in the house

These Don’t Work with KR having hit JOK with her car Theory
JOKs injuries are not consistent with a collision
JOKs arm injuries are consistent with dog bite

But to me, neither of the theories match all the facts.
And.. the facts can be explained without using either of the theories we’ve been given.

It is possible it was an accident, he got out of the car near the curb and tripped and fell, dropped and broke the glass, fell backwards and hit his head.
No one was to blame until evidence was created to pin the death on KR.

Many actions were then taken by people, and seem to be swallowed as normal by those who agree with that side, and abnormal to those that don’t agree.

And yes there are too many questions, which means there is Reasonable Doubt
Reasonable Doubt = Not Guilty
But, Not Guilty does not mean KR did not do something to cause JOKs death… Anymore than KR being found Guilty will mean cops didn’t plant evidence.

It seems that the story that works is between the two theories

IMO

 

[Forest_Wood]

Judge Canonne stated clearly that if a juror thinks KR likely hit him, maybe hit him, possibly hit him, or probably hit him, even if it was accidental, then it must be Not Guilty. A person has to be certain she was responsible for JOKs death. This has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that her car hit him, causing his death. There are various other ways he could have died that night.

• A drunken stumble
• An animal attack knocking him down
• A fight w/ someone
• Tripping and passing out on the ground

All the charges relate to her hitting him with her SUV.
If the car didn't hit, they must acquit.

MOO

 

[Leilei]

Judge Canonne stated clearly that if a juror thinks KR likely hit him, maybe hit him, possibly hit him, or probably hit him, even if it was accidental, then it must be Not Guilty. A person has to be certain she was responsible for JOKs death. This has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that her car hit him, causing his death. There are various other ways he could have died that night.

• A drunken stumble
• An animal attack knocking him down
• A fight w/ someone
• Tripping and passing out on the ground

All the charges relate to her hitting him with her SUV.
If the car didn't hit, they must acquit.

MOO

And those are the facts.
NG BARD.
Thank you for this!
IMO.

 

[JasmineD]

the fact that so many here are thinking guilty (a surprise after closing) makes me think we could be in for another hung jury.

I'm not convinced everyone here has watched all or even most of trial. The jury, on the other hand, has seen it all.

 

[keek]

I'm not convinced everyone here has watched all or even most of trial. The jury, on the other hand, has seen it all.

It seems clear with some comments that they have seen click baits, exploitation type people's blogs etc as state as facts things that were long discounted, not up to date, not familiar with the independent experts and pretty much basing on KR's appearance, interpretation of her behavior and the drinking of the night. Right, this jury in trial 2, unfortunately HAS seen the evidence presented. That is the key in coming to the verdict as N.G. IMO

 

[keek]

It seems clear with some comments that they have seen click baits, exploitation type people's blogs etc as state as facts things that were long discounted, not up to date, not familiar with the independent experts and pretty much basing on KR's appearance, interpretation of her behavior and the drinking of the night. Right, this jury in trial 2, unfortunately HAS seen the evidence presented. That is the key in coming to the verdict as N.G. IMO

Also, there a very small amount of the guilty here, seems about four or five if going by comments. IMO

 

[Forest_Wood]

Based on the poll here of 381 votes:
80 people voted Guilty (21%),
225 voted NG (59%),
40 voted I Don't Know (11%)
36 people voted Guilty but with enough reasonable doubt so find Not Guilty (9%),

I expect another mistrial due to a hung jury but hope she is found NG due to Reasonable Doubt.

 

[mzmarymac]

Karen was still there near the flagpole after RN & friends had gone. She didn't reverse while they were there, so it had to have been after they'd gone.

So then where was JOK all that time?

 

[Luna20]

Judge Canonne stated clearly that if a juror thinks KR likely hit him, maybe hit him, possibly hit him, or probably hit him, even if it was accidental, then it must be Not Guilty. A person has to be certain she was responsible for JOKs death. This has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that her car hit him, causing his death. There are various other ways he could have died that night.

• A drunken stumble
• An animal attack knocking him down
• A fight w/ someone
• Tripping and passing out on the ground

All the charges relate to her hitting him with her SUV.
If the car didn't hit, they must acquit.

MOO

I’m curious if the jury feels that they don’t even have to belabour this because nothing has been proven without reasonable doubt. I realize that they have to go through the process but if I were a juror I would already know that there is reasonable doubt.

Why spend days looking at data when there is no proof that she hit him?

 

[shotgun09]

So then where was JOK all that time?

Taking 36 steps in a westerly direction ( towards the house)........

 

[Soulmagent]

I'm not convinced everyone here has watched all or even most of trial. The jury, on the other hand, has seen it all.

I promise I watched it all. Still do not got a clue.

 

[waldojabba]

Based on the poll here of 381 votes:
80 people voted Guilty (21%),
225 voted NG (59%),
40 voted I Don't Know (11%)
36 people voted Guilty but with enough reasonable doubt so find Not Guilty (9%),

I expect another mistrial due to a hung jury but hope she is found NG due to Reasonable Doubt.

I think that poll was earlier on? Before ARCCA ? Did I miss a second one?

I am expecting a hung jury although its clear to me that it should be NG because legally the CW did not meet the burden of proof.
I sense though that some get confused with believing their opinions are facts and if on the jury maybe decide to just go with their opinion.

I am still hearing people talk about ARCCA as a biased expert for the Defense.
It has been pointed out numerous times in both trials and obvi here - that the ARCCA guys were hired initially by an independent LE agency/FBI/DOJ and their results were given to BOTH the D and P.
The P decided to not use them.
This is Fact and not contested.

The results did not support the arrest and charges the P/DA had already filed.
Which I have to admit still really bothers me. How inept. You dont even make a call to discuss?
They definitely had the blinders on and have wasted a ton of tax payer cash
It boggles my simple mind


JMO