NOT GUILTY MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #38 Retrial

[jepop]

What a travesty. I'm extremely sorry for John's family and friends, the pain in knowing that she got away with throwing an enraged and drunken tantrum with a 4,000 lb vehicle killing their loved one. The evidence was clearly there to convict on Manslaughter while Driving Intoxicated and Leaving the Scene. Too bad the jurors were either unable to see the truth beyond the falsehoods, the hype and the false celebrity or too scared by the probable repercussions from her adoring fans. This is ALL just my opinion.

I may be misreading you but your post appears to innately make what might be considered serious accusations aimed at the jurors; ie that they lied to the judge and attorney's during voir dire re prior knowledge of the case and/or lied to the judge when she asked her daily questions of them. IMO if so, this is entirely not called for.

 

[waldojabba]

I thought during cross of all the defense witness he was acting like a defense attorney: Being confrontational, sowing confusion, jumping from topic to topic, introducing supposition as fact.

I think he had been beat up pretty good by Dr LaSordra, because as HB tried to create scenarios that would include impact of the Lexus on JOK, she simply repeated that she could not agree with any such speculation because in her learned opinion no such impact ever occurred. He was obviously frustrated.

I did think that after he questioned Dr Wolfe and tried hard to discount the experiments performed without comprehending the impetus, and then tried to attribute holes created by the LE lab to road rash (and got caught), he was chastened greatly and from there on he was more or less seeking surrender. Certainly the biomechanical expert from ARRCA was having no problem holding his own during HB's cross.

I would agree, he recognized that he was beat and I don't think the verdict was any great surprise to him.
IMO throughout

I am not sure that it was purposeful for Hank to elicit pro defense testimony on cross when D presented their case.
I think after he went in to his standard attack dog mode and was making no points with witnesses - he started swinging for the bleachers out of last ditch desperation.
Hank is really a defense lawyer so in the stress of it all I think he started "shape shifting" and reverted to his defense attorney behavior so in effect he started self destructing.
It was really something to watch!
When he said to Dr L -about the tail light pieces -when she answered she knew about them but did not find them important
Hank snapped "What? So you think they were planted by the police ?"
I near fell out of my seat. Thanks Hank for throwing that out there to the jurors.
Moments like that were Hank's undoing near the end.
But the case was lost on its merits.
How can you be a serious lawyer and bring in the Blue Paint guy ? Bc they had nothing else.
They had no case and Hank knew it - he tried every dirty trick with JBC's help - Hence her cockeyed juror forms etc
JMO

 

[floridafreshsqueez]

IMO the civil case will go nowhere. KR can have expert witnesses testify, yet again, that there is no evidence to support that she is in any way responsible for his death.

She’s not going to settle with them either. The woman has nothing left.

JOK’s family would be better served going after the CPD. IDK how the statutes of limitations work as far as home owners insurance for personal injury, but they should have filed suit against the Alberts.

I got teary eyed yesterday hearing the verdict read as the crowd erupted outside. I hope KR gets financial support so she can recoup as much of her losses as possible. It won’t fix anything, but at a minimum she deserves to be compensated and comfortable.

 

[justbeachy]

Good morning, fellow KR trial watchers! I can only imagine how great she and her team must feel this morning. I’ve enjoyed the camaraderie and even the friendly debates on this board so I’ll miss our daily postings. Hopefully I’ll see some familiar “faces” on the Adelson and/or Kohberger boards. Now what the heck am I going to listen to while I’m at work until the those trials get underway?

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

What a travesty. I'm extremely sorry for John's family and friends, the pain in knowing that she got away with throwing an enraged and drunken tantrum with a 4,000 lb vehicle killing their loved one. The evidence was clearly there to convict on Manslaughter while Driving Intoxicated and Leaving the Scene. Too bad the jurors were either unable to see the truth beyond the falsehoods, the hype and the false celebrity or too scared by the probable repercussions from her adoring fans. This is ALL just my opinion.

Or they didn't think she did it based on the evidence. Just because you do doesnt mean anyone else does JMO

 

[Florida_marlin]

I am not sure that it was purposeful for Hank to elicit pro defense testimony on cross when D presented their case.
I think after he went in to his standard attack dog mode and was making no points with witnesses - he started swinging for the bleachers out of last ditch desperation.
Hank is really a defense lawyer so in the stress of it all I think he started "shape shifting" and reverted to his defense attorney behavior so in effect he started self destructing.
It was really something to watch!
When he said to Dr L -about the tail light pieces -when she answered she knew about them but did not find them important
Hank snapped "What? So you think they were planted by the police ?"
I near fell out of my seat. Thanks Hank for throwing that out there to the jurors.
Moments like that were Hank's undoing near the end.
But the case was lost on its merits.
How can you be a serious lawyer and bring in the Blue Paint guy ? Bc they had nothing else.
They had no case and Hank knew it - he tried every dirty trick with JBC's help - Hence her cockeyed juror forms etc
JMO

Yes, Hank’s bringing that statement into the court was hilarious. The DA got what he asked for with Brennen.

 

[floridafreshsqueez]

Yes, Hank’s bringing that statement into the court was hilarious. The DA got what he asked for with Brennen.

It’s odd, HB left his cushy private defense life to be a special prosecutor in the KR case for $200k. The man lives in Dover, one of the wealthiest suburbs of Boston. After Morrissey came under investigation, he took the job when no one else would.

 

[Florida_marlin]

IMO the civil case will go nowhere. KR can have expert witnesses testify, yet again, that there is no evidence to support that she is in any way responsible for his death.

She’s not going to settle with them either. The woman has nothing left.

JOK’s family would be better served going after the CPD. IDK how the statutes of limitations work as far as home owners insurance for personal injury, but they should have filed suit against the Alberts.

I got teary eyed yesterday hearing the verdict read as the crowd erupted outside. I hope KR gets financial support so she can recoup as much of her losses as possible. It won’t fix anything, but at a minimum she deserves to be compensated and comfortable.

KR needs to file suit in Federal court. Qualified immunity protects the prosecutors, but not the local jurisdiction. Sue the local jurisdiction (city, county, whatever is app), for either wrongful prosecution (malfeasance of LE or DA) or violating equal protection (videos of drunken cops who drove home). At the least, if they want this to continue to go away and not get more discovery, they would want to settle. When they settle, turn it around on them, “see,n they admitted wrongdoing!”.

 

[Dawookie]

What a travesty. I'm extremely sorry for John's family and friends, the pain in knowing that she got away with throwing an enraged and drunken tantrum with a 4,000 lb vehicle killing their loved one. The evidence was clearly there to convict on Manslaughter while Driving Intoxicated and Leaving the Scene. Too bad the jurors were either unable to see the truth beyond the falsehoods, the hype and the false celebrity or too scared by the probable repercussions from her adoring fans. This is ALL just my opinion.

The evidence clearly wasn't there, the state didn't even come close to proving he was hit by a vehicle. I'd say the jurors saw the truth through all the falsehoods and lies presented by Proctor, tampered videos, the magically destroyed tail light, etc. I do feel sorry for his family and friends that werent involved because of a ****** investigation by Proctor who seemingly didn't want the truth to come out

 

[jepop]

It’s odd, HB left his cushy private defense life to be a special prosecutor in the KR case for $200k. The man in Dover, one of the wealthiest suburbs of Boston. After Morrissey came under investigation, he took the job when no one else would.

I think he got more, or will be getting more, than 200k ? Idk but imo that was just the equivalent of a down payment? Regardless, maybe he was the only special prosecutor willing to do it, assuming that no one in-house was inclined to touch it with a ten foot pole,!

ETA I think there was a good chance he could name his price within reason. But I also think there was probably a mixed bag of reasons for Brennan wanting to head up the 2025 re-persecution.

 

[Forest_Wood]

Does anybody think Hank threw the trial towards the end (with the defense expert), or just me?

Something seemed to change with him… I think!

Regardless, the verdict is so good.

What does it mean to "throw" a trial?

 

[floridafreshsqueez]

What does it mean to "throw" a trial?

Essentially, that he purposefully nuked the CW’s case on purpose to put it out of its misery.

IDTS though, HB is a defense attorney…he defended the CW until the bitter end as most defense attorneys do. Except Sarah Boone’s lawyers and Taylor Schabusinesses’s lawyers (LOL).

I believe he was outmatched with that witness, and CW’s case was deflated by that point.

 

[Forest_Wood]

I think it's an exaggeration to say he threw it. Threw implies he deliberately set out to lose. That's different to realising you're beat and can do little about it, which is what the situation seemed to be to me.

MOO

I agree with you and disagree with HB "throwing" the trial. I don't really know what throwing a trial means, except it sounds like trying to say HB didn't try his hardest to prosecute, which I believe he really did try every angle in his line of questioning, and also we saw him even trying to cheat to win this trial with misrepresenting the holes in the sweater and slowing down the video of Karen talking to make it appear she was slurring. So, no, if throwing the trial means he tried to lose, then I disagree. I was actually impressed with some of the questions he asked the witnesses in the end to counter their testimonies, then I lost complete respect when he played his dirty tricks. Throwing the trial sounds like he didn't work his hardest and gives him credit for the superior work of the defense lawyers and Karen Read in this trial. If anyone thought HB threw this trial, he wouldn't get any future clients because nobody could trust him, and could even sue him I would imagine, and he could be disbarred.
MOO

 

[Izzylizzy]

What a travesty. I'm extremely sorry for John's family and friends, the pain in knowing that she got away with throwing an enraged and drunken tantrum with a 4,000 lb vehicle killing their loved one. The evidence was clearly there to convict on Manslaughter while Driving Intoxicated and Leaving the Scene. Too bad the jurors were either unable to see the truth beyond the falsehoods, the hype and the false celebrity or too scared by the probable repercussions from her adoring fans. This is ALL just my opinion.

Obviously the "evidence" wasn't "clearly there" for the 12 jurors to convict her of manslaughter and I've seen your "scared" accusation used quite often when one doesn't agree with a jury's verdict as the latest go-to.
IMO

 

[turaj]

Does anybody think Hank threw the trial towards the end (with the defense expert), or just me?

Something seemed to change with him… I think!

Regardless, the verdict is so good.

I don't know if "threw the trial" would be the term I would use but he did change about 1/2 way thru and I think he knew he had no case. That combined with the defense sharping up their game and focusing more on the straight science of no collision really sealed the deal. If there was any disagreements in jury room they got to the right spot...and even the bac test was questionable.

 

[kuromiiiilove]

What a travesty. I'm extremely sorry for John's family and friends, the pain in knowing that she got away with throwing an enraged and drunken tantrum with a 4,000 lb vehicle killing their loved one. The evidence was clearly there to convict on Manslaughter while Driving Intoxicated and Leaving the Scene. Too bad the jurors were either unable to see the truth beyond the falsehoods, the hype and the false celebrity or too scared by the probable repercussions from her adoring fans. This is ALL just my opinion.

The real travesty would’ve been convicting someone based on assumptions, hypotheticals, and emotion-based arguments instead of actual evidence. A full acquittal on all charges related to John’s death means the jury didn’t just have doubts, they found the state’s ENTIRE theory unconvincing. That’s reasonable doubt. They saw it. If your takeaway is that the jurors were either too dumb or too scared, maybe you’re the one struggling with the verdict. JMO.

 

[Forest_Wood]

A few thoughts about the verdict, and about some of the comments made ...
1 IN THEORY - the cw can appeal the verdict if they have legal reason to question the legitimacy of how it was obtained. (An appeal of the 1st trial is not a 2nd trial and therefore is not a violation of the restriction against "double jeopardy.") But appeals of such verdicts are rare, so while it's possible, it's VERY unlikely we'll see one here.

2 The civil case, while not needing a BARD finding, still has to overcome the barrier of proving that KR's vehicle hit JOK, and the overwhelming evidence is that it did not. The fact that she drove OUI doesn't by itself prove she hit anything, and the science and medical evidence says she didn't hit him. In fact, every witness agreed his injuries didn't show he was hit by a vehicle at all. The simple fact is that how his body injuries looked is NOT what someone looks like when a vehicle hits them.

3 Justtrish wrote the following in the last thread: "I hope she does not appeal the OUI. She admitted she did this. She was drinking at the bar, she was driving, she drove that morning and her BAC was over the .08 limit at 9am after she drove at 5-6am time frame. Clearly, she had alcohol in her system, and she drove her vehicle. If I was her, I'd just let it be. 1 year probation and do the classes. Move on with her life." I think that's good thinking, and I think it might point us to consider an overlooked aspect - what is KR's thinking?

4 To expand on that a bit, consider all the things that KR/def did that seemed to make no sense. Later on, that very day of JOK's death, she asked/spoke about the possibility of having hit him but wasn't clear at all on what happened. Much confusion in her words. Eventually she did the Body in the Snow thing in which she talked about too much drinking. At the trial, the defense pushed to have separate OUI charges added to the things she could be convicted of, when the prosec wasn't asking for it. When defining "what time" for OUI, the defense pushed for the broadest time possible (making it even easier to find her guilty). Why? Why? Why? Why? ....

When I ponder it, I am leaning to the idea that it was less about some sort of grand strategy, and more about KR having a jury decide the truth of KR's actions that night. Here's what I think: KR herself truly had (has) no clue what happened that night, didn't recall it (and still doesn't!!), was confused and grasping, but she does admit she could have been "overserved" as they say it, in light of her confusion and lack of recollection. Was she drunk driving? 'I dunno, I can't recall at all, but I'm glad to let the jury take a look and decide.' So I wonder if she is being willing to admit to what truth she knows rather than fighting it ("the truth will set you free"), and then let the science tell her and everyone else the facts of the things she does NOT recall.

5 While I was in support of a full NG verdict, I must admit I'm kinda liking this result. It's certainly a relief (and an unexpected blessing) JudgeB didn't arbitrarily impose her personal bias on the OUI sentence, so that KR got the same sentence as anyone else convicted of OUI 1st offense. And tbh, I must say that I like the idea KR is having to deal with her drinking issue (with a threat of significant consequences if she doesn't). The trial showed she and her circle all being VERY heavy imbibers. Drunk driving is horrendous and a potential killer, even if that outcome was not what happened this time. She dodged a bullet here. Hopefully having a probation hanging over her head can serve as a wake-up call to grow up and start to choose better actions.

Very well said!

I imagine the lawyer they hired who served on the jury last trial was helpful in bringing that to light for the defense.

I think you are right, Karen Read does not remember what happened and in her mind, she was not responsible for murder or manslaughter but she knew she was responsible for operating her vehicle while consuming liquor. She was willing to be found guilty for what she knew she did, but not for what others said she did.

I agree with her guilty verdict of OUI and the program she takes will surely inform and benefit her going forward.

MOO

 

[mpnola]

My hope is that John's family and the children can find some healing and peace. This whole process must be beyond difficult for them.

 

[Izzylizzy]

“God bless those 12 people on the jury, members of your community had courage and sat there day after day, weighed the evidence, did their job, they’re the ones who are the heroes,” said Read’s defense attorney, Bob Alessi. “We’ve seen the evidence, we’ve seen it up close, this should not be over by any stretch.”

Read’s lawyers tell Boston 25 that they’re also taking tonight to just decompress, and they’re beyond thankful this second trial didn’t end in a mistrial."

‘We’re still numb’: Karen Read and family celebrate not guilty verdict

After leaving the courthouse in Dedham, Karen Read went to her hotel here in the seaport for a couple of hours, and then came to Mastro’s here for dinner with her family to celebrate that her case is finally over.

www.boston25news.com

 

[turaj]

Don't know what others take on it was/is but that reading of the verdict sure was not in the form that most courtrooms in the US do it. It was all so rushed and unclear. If you blinked you missed it and jury foreperson seemed himself to be confused on the reading. Bev gave no warnings about decorum in the court room. And then the sentencing.....Bev actually wanted to make them wait a week for a misdemeanor oui? Good for HB for getting that job done. I don't know if it was on purpose but zero cameras on the JOK family. I assume they left quickly and while I agree with verdict boy that must have been a tough scene getting out of the court area yesterday for them.
Anyone see any of them on the talk show circuit please post. I usually miss all of that. Thank you for all the comments and discussion for this trial....so nice to see others are thinking the same thoughts as we moved thru this trial. See you on the next one!