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

[lonetraveler]

one hair that even moved between the 1st picture and the 2nd picture that they took. But it stayed on the SUV during that blizzard

That's as amazing as the glass from the cocktail glass.

 

[Wishbone]

If they don't reach a verdict soon we will have to sit thru more of this tomorrow because I don't see them staying late today. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934690922538643962

:0

 

[Wishbone]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934690922538643962

:0

why is there no court thur and fri.

 

[STLBlues]

why is there no court thur and fri.

Thursday would be for Juneteenth I believe. Not sure about Friday.

 

[shotgun09]

Thursday would be for Juneteenth I believe. Not sure about Friday.

Fridays are " Beach" days ???

 

[kuromiiiilove]

why is there no court thur and fri.

Thursday is a federal holiday, I believe. Juneteenth. Not sure about Friday…

 

[mzmarymac]

Ms. Read is absolutely not guilty.

The injuries to Mr. O'Keefe are not consistent with a vehicle versus pedestrian collision. None of the experts on either side has said strongly that the injuries point to that collision. If she hit him with her SUV, the hit was some kind of one-in-a-thousand coincidence to produce those injuries. The injuries alone mean that the prosecution cannot meet the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution's "expert" tried to make a case for how the scratches on Mr. O'Keefe's arm could be caused by the SUV, but even that case was weak.

Five or six witnesses had a chance to see Mr. O'Keefe's body on the lawn that night. None of them saw him. Eyewitness testimony can be unreliable. The prosecution can make that excuse, but an excuse is not evidence. Given the nature of people's observations, I don't think that eyewitness testimony is that unreliable. Higgins was a trained law enforcement officer. He should have better than average situational awareness. When he walked out of the Albert house, he would consciously and subconsciously scan his surroundings for anything threatening or unusual. That he didn't notice a body on the lawn within about thirty yards of where he was is hard to believe. When he turned on the lights of his Jeep, they would have been shining directly on Mr. O'Keefe's body if the prosecution hypothesis was correct. He didn't see a body on the lawn. Mr. McCabe's headlights would have shone directly on Mr. O'Keefe's body as he backed out of the driveway, and he didn't see a body. The passengers in the back seat of his car would likely be looking forward, and they didn't see a body. Julie Nagel's claim of seeing something is meaningless. Mr. O'Keefe would not have been covered at the time. I believe some young people left the house, and they didn't see a body. Jen McCabe kept looking out the window at Ms. Read's vehicle, but she never reported hearing the sounds of an SUV driving backwards at a high rate of speed or of hitting someone. She claims to have been hanging around that room to watch, but she never reports unusual lights as an SUV made odd moves. She either didn't look out after Ms. Read left or looked out and didn't see Mr. O'Keefe's body even though she was looking for him. Mr. Loughran passed the house four times that night, twice in each direction. He would see the yard from a different perspective than others and with different lighting. He didn't see a body on the lawn. The eyewitness testimony doesn't support the prosecution hypothesis.

The prosecution has shown incompetence and dishonesty throughout the process. Proctor never had any interest in doing an honest investigation. The prosecution reversed the sally port video in the first trial and edited some portions. Officer Deaver's testimony shows that she's either lying now or is subject to hallucinations. Her "false memory" is just a hallucination if that's what happened. That she told the hallucination to the FBI is difficult to believe. She should be charged with perjury. All of the answers that prosecution witnesses gave in the first trial were evasive. Higgins and Albert are experienced investigators. They knew that the investigation would be interested in the phones of everyone who was at the house that night. Instead of keeping their phones to make them available, they destroyed their phones at the same time about a day before receiving an order to save the phones. As experienced investigators, they knew better. Whether the simultaneous destruction of phones was prompted by inside information about the preservation order is impossible to know. If that simultaneous destruction of phones was just a coincidence, it's a remarkable coincidence.

Some "I hit him" testimony of the first EMT came from a long-time friend of the McCabes who was evasive about how close they were. Other EMT testimony was from people who would be under the power of this powerful family in crooked Canton. Kerry Roberts admitted to giving false testimony in the grand jury. No one should put any real value on the "I hit him" claims.

The taillight was not broken as badly that night as the prosecution claims. When Ms. Read left Mr. O'Keefe's apartment that morning, the taillight was much more intact than it would later prove to be. Video of the SUV being put on the tow truck isn't great, but it shows enough taillight to show that the taillight wasn't as broken as would later be claimed. The testimony of the Deighton police officer is further evidence that the taillight was not as broken as the prosecution claims.

Nothing about this case points to Ms. Read being guilty. I have no doubt that she's factually innocent. An honest jury should easily acquit her.

My concern is that the prosecution has already bought three or four jurors. Those jurors may not be able to force a guilty verdict, but they will be able to force another mistrial. The corrupt judge and corrupt prosecutor are waging a war of attrition. If they win someday, the injustice will be compounded. The real killer or killers of Mr. O'Keefe will never be punished. The investigation was so badly bungled that no case can ever be made against anyone. I'm not even certain of who is really guilty.

Great summary. Also, what is glaringly important to me is that there was never a manner of death on the death certificate. Not homicide. Undetermined. Not many murder cases without homicide as the manner of death.

 

[keek]

Fridays are " Beach" days ???

DEF a beach day, Friday. as usual with early outs in the past on Fridays.. IMO

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Thursday would be for Juneteenth I believe. Not sure about Friday.

Jinx! You beat me to it!

 

[keek]

Great summary. Also, what is glaringly important to me is that there was never a manner of death on the death certificate. Not homicide. Undetermined. Not many murder cases without homicide as the manner of death.

Coroner would not do that and proctor was furious and his sidekick there. Said he was pretty much adamant to put that. IMO

 

[mzmarymac]

A little O/T but do you guys think that KR or any of the other legal teams or even the players in all of this read this forum?

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934690922538643962

:0

This is getting ridiculous....

 

[kuromiiiilove]

A little O/T but do you guys think that KR or any of the other legal teams or even the players in all of this read this forum?

Not sure about reading Websleuths specifically, but Mark Bederow said the defense was absolutely watching social media and even brought up a few discrepancies that were mentioned on social media. I’m too burnt out to remember examples at the moment.

 

[shotgun09]

A little O/T but do you guys think that KR or any of the other legal teams or even the players in all of this read this forum?

I have often suspected this, in many trials... but have no way to prove it.

 

[LittleSeaTree]

""if the options aren't flying ,there must be a nullifying?"
"if the dog bit, you must acquit"
If Mass says you hit a man ,bet you'll spend months watching a fan"

That’s the spirit!

 

[turaj]

are there any media reporting from inside the building? I guess no questions coming out?

 

[lohrtabitha]

Is there a source for this? What possible reason could she give and who paid for it?

Her testimony this trial. She slipped and said even the auto repair guy came over

 

[turaj]

Not sure about reading Websleuths specifically, but Mark Bederow said the defense was absolutely watching social media and even brought up a few discrepancies that were mentioned on social media. I’m too burnt out to remember examples at the moment.

I think they watch the shows at night or have a staffer watch and mention anything noteworthy. I think one watched might be Lawyer You Know.

 

[Soulmagent]

If they don't reach a verdict soon we will have to sit thru more of this tomorrow because I don't see them staying late today. Hope I'm wrong.

I Was going to say they should probably hurry up ,if they plan on attending JM's next party.
Then I decided ,I should not say that. This is me ,not saying that.