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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #781
I don’t but I could see where someone might.

I don’t think she answered their question about #2-5. She should’ve said something like “if you find her guilty of one of these charges, she’s only guilty of the offense you checked” but, ya know, slightly more legal-ish.
Legal-ish…perfect. I just don’t trust this crooked judge. There are fail safes tho, right?!
 
  • #782
Judge just said "we'll see everybody at about 1:30" and the lawyers all left.
 
  • #783
Yes, it seems in clearing things up, she made them a little more murky.
~~~~
I’d like to think the jury will be right back but someone will probably want lunch.
And Bev only wants to serve them bologna sandwiches.
 
  • #784
Yes, it seems in clearing things up, she made them a little more murky.
~~~~
I’d like to think the jury will be right back but someone will probably want lunch.
Hah! You’re right. Back at 1:30
 
  • #785
Yes, it seems in clearing things up, she made them a little more murky.
~~~~
I’d like to think the jury will be right back but someone will probably want lunch.

Agree, not really much clearer.

After the sidebar she said 'see everybody back at 1:30', so it seems it's lunchtime.
 
  • #786
Melanie Little thinks they will return very fast with verdict now that is is clear. But now they want lunch back at 130
 
  • #787
clearly looking at JOK family they know she will not be convicted of John's murder. All of this and the real people responsible are walking free.
 
  • #788
Yes, it seems in clearing things up, she made them a little more murky.
~~~~
I’d like to think the jury will be right back but someone will probably want lunch.
I thought she made it as clear as mud. 😂 Maybe they will just acquit on all charges. Also, lunch break!
 
  • #789
After reading the instructions the judge asked the jury if that made it any clearer. Seems they were confused IMO

It seemed like she didn't even understand them herself which is just par for the course. She could not be any more obtuse and difficult in my opinion.
 
  • #790
Imo they are considering guilty of OUI but the confusing charge 2 on the slip needed clarification so good on them for asking. It also appears they’re considering fact there is no evidence of her intoxication level at midnight whereas they have BAC in morning. I’m sensing a win for Read.
 
  • #791
Clock stopped...probably eating a quick lunch and verdict at 1:30pm. I think those instructions will get them where they needed to go.
 
  • #792
It seemed like she didn't even understand them herself which is just par for the course. She could not be any more obtuse and difficult in my opinion.
Made it even more confusing. imo
 
  • #793
Trying not to read into anything here, but I'm really curious what some of the Gs think after all this. Kind of quiet this morning on that side. Not judging! Genuinely curious of their thoughts.
 
  • #794
So I heard someone say that they reckon that either, the jury has asked the question because they're going down the slip and have decided everything but got confused by the OUI so that's where they are at in their deliberations. But I wonder if they've skipped, decided the rest and have left querying this charge to the end so that they just have one to decide when they go back into the room.

Thoughts?
 
  • #795
  • #796
Yeah, we believe the guy that is charged with WI and is the mouthpiece for KR and her defense team. jmo
The guy charged with WI for being an advocate of KR. Got it.
 
  • #797
Law and Crime feed is showing a very calm quiet controlled crowd outside the courthouse waiting for a verdict. Expect the noise level to increase if the verdict is not guilty!
 
  • #798
Yeah Turtleboy very much a KR advocate, not a commentator. Take with massive pinch of salt!!
 
  • #799
Anyone else hearing there is another question coming after lunch at 1:30?
 
  • #800
Yeah Turtleboy very much a KR advocate, not a commentator. Take with massive pinch of salt!!
Except he's been pretty much correct since the getgo. And without him, quite honestly, none of us would be here talking about this case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
148
Guests online
3,079
Total visitors
3,227

Forum statistics

Threads
632,115
Messages
18,622,301
Members
243,026
Latest member
JC_MacLeod
Back
Top