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

[Wishbone]

Considering if a juror made a decision of guilt or innocence because they thought information was being hidden from them, by either side, or were considering information known by other means than what was presented to them in this trial in court, to help imply reasonable doubt is not what the jurors were charged to do. I was replying to a particularly worded post.

The jury based their decision on the fact the cw could not prove KR hit JO with her Lexus. Prosecution could not prove what she was charged with.

 

[Wishbone]

I believe when a defendant contradicts herself it should be seriously considered, JMO

The evidence of it not being proven that the Lexus hit JO is what had to be considered.That is what KR was charged with not with how one wants to interpret her words.

 

[jepop]

Considering if a juror made a decision of guilt or innocence because they thought information was being hidden from them, by either side, or were considering information known by other means than what was presented to them in this trial in court, to help imply reasonable doubt is not what the jurors were charged to do. I was replying to a particularly worded post.

Certainly not the case here by all accounts. Speaking generally, people should stop attacking the jury. I'm sure most law abiding folk would agree the online attacks on these jurors are not ok, those responsible are probably breaking the law. moo

 

[ch_13]

This would prove, in my opinion, that these jurors didn't do their jobs, if they were considering what wasn't presented to them as evidence. IF in fact that was the case.

Considering if a juror made a decision of guilt or innocence because they thought information was being hidden from them, by either side, or were considering information known by other means than what was presented to them in this trial in court, to help imply reasonable doubt is not what the jurors were charged to do. I was replying to a particularly worded post.

The jurors who have spoken to the media have given a litany of reasons why they voted not guilty. They've mentioned the expert witness testimony, video evidence, the condition of John's body, the poor police investigation, and many, many other things.

<modsnip>

And, in fact, things were being hidden from this jury. The whole FBI investigation! The lead detective! The third-party culprits! And much, much more! It must have been pretty obvious that there were huge, gaping holes in the commonwealth's presentation of the case. The fact that a juror remarked on this is hardly noteworthy nor does it mean that they did anything wrong.

 

[Observer33]

The jurors who have spoken to the media have given a litany of reasons why they voted not guilty. They've mentioned the expert witness testimony, video evidence, the condition of John's body, the poor police investigation, and many, many other things.

<modsnip>

And, in fact, things were being hidden from this jury. The whole FBI investigation! The lead detective! The third-party culprits! And much, much more! It must have been pretty obvious that there were huge, gaping holes in the commonwealth's presentation of the case. The fact that a juror remarked on this is hardly noteworthy.

I loved that they stacked the deck against KR including the judge, and they still couldn't convict her.

 

[sunshineray]

The jury based their decision on the fact the cw could not prove KR hit JO with her Lexus. Prosecution could not prove what she was charged with.

Like I said, I was replying to a particularly worded post and not rehashing anything else

 

[sunshineray]

The evidence of it not being proven that the Lexus hit JO is what had to be considered.That is what KR was charged with not with how one wants to interpret her words.

I'm allowed to interpret her words as opposed to what was testified to, on the stand by witnesses.

 

[PamCake]

Thats an interesting theory. Who could they have possibly set her home with considering her temperament towards people?

I believe the dog went home with Brian & Nicole Albert's daughter, Caitlyn, so somebody she knows. Her boyfriend picked her up, even tho she was supposed to spend the night at 34F.

 

[sunshineray]

Certainly not the case here by all accounts. Speaking generally, people should stop attacking the jury. I'm sure most law abiding folk would agree the online attacks on these jurors are not ok, those responsible are probably breaking the law. moo

I was replying to a particularly worded post. I'm allowed my opinion that IF something like what I stated was in fact to have occured, that would not be what the jury was charged to do. AJMO

 

[HarmonyE.]

Juror 11, Paula, has been speaking out the most, she is great! In a podcast last night with TB and Bederow, she was asked about techstream data and timing... she said that Burgess and the info about timing and data... because it was changed mid-trial, she just didn't trust it. (she is a licensed lawyer in Brazil and knew that was not "normal")

She concluded that he went in the house... how? Whiffen's testimony. His phone was going in a westerly direction and then the location data was more unreliable and was a wider area, she said because he was in the house. Even mentioned that we have all had that problem, go in a building and your signal is not as good.

Corruption/cops involved - she agreed with the foreman... if a body was found on her front lawn, they cops would have been banging on her door and wanting to come in. She thinks the Alberts could have slept through all the noise, since they were drinking the night before.. BUT.. she says no way the dog wouldn't have been barking and going nuts. Being from Brazil, she said police corruption is a thing, she said no cop wants other cops poking around their house, she sees the same thing in this case and is more aware of it in the area now (not sure she was before this case)

Her whole interview was about 2 hours long.... she really did sound like 'one of us'. She drew from personal experiences to make common sense conclusions.

She talks a bit about the deliberations, it sounds like they did exactly what a jury is supposed to do, they went through evidence, they went through testimony - witness by witness. Oh and one tidbit she said... the foreman didn't take any notes, but he knew everything, every number, every detail.

It was great to see her reactions as TB and Bederow told her things that she had no clue about, from the 1st trial, and other things they were not allowed in court. AND.. things that happened during the 2nd trial that she had no idea about yet.

If anyone wants to listen to it... you can find it on TB's X or youtube.

So true! She's amazing. Bederow couldn't stop smiling with every point she hit on. And with her comments about the corruption amongst Brazillian police, I think TB learned a bit last night about the value of diversity within groups.

Sadly, and not that Hank and Morrissey care, she is being viciously attacked and threatened in that cesspool known as X. I got the feeling Bederow would like to help her here, and I hope she does take legal action. As he said, what they are doing is illegal.

 

[sunshineray]

The jurors who have spoken to the media have given a litany of reasons why they voted not guilty. They've mentioned the expert witness testimony, video evidence, the condition of John's body, the poor police investigation, and many, many other things.

However, you're jumping on one remark where a juror said that it seemed like information was being hidden from them to say, "See, see. The jury didn't do their job." Yet, you're ignoring all the other reasons that the jury has given for their decision.

And, in fact, things were being hidden from this jury. The whole FBI investigation! The lead detective! The third-party culprits! And much, much more! It must have been pretty obvious that there were huge, gaping holes in the commonwealth's presentation of the case. The fact that a juror remarked on this is hardly noteworthy nor does it mean that they did anything wrong.

IF even that one juror used that to determine their verdict OR sway others in their verdict that, IMO, would be not doing their job as they were charged by the court to do. This is my opinion which I am allowed to express.

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1937156030745432266

 

[turaj]

JURY INTERVIEWS.....I have watched some of these. Juror 11 is talking the most and I am concerned she is going to go a bit too far and reveal things from inside the deliberation room. Last night with TB she commented about talking about who people were in the galley on the respective sides with another juror and when TB asked when she dialed it back but it was clearly during the trial. She is getting threats and frankly I think she should stop the interviews and social media games. Enough. She could have some really bad results if she continues. The Canton area is toxic and she is feeding right into that mentality. I find her smart and engaging for sure but I have heard enough. Free speech is one thing but she has a family and should be happy to resume her life. The jurors that are remaining silent are smart.

 

[keek]

IMO, Brennan is 'protecting' the Albert's and McCabes, probably at the direction of Morrissey. This trial was never about Justice for John. This was about covering the families involved. It still is. They want to continue to blame the " blogger" now, for all their self perceived misfortune.

I came across this disgustingly self serving 'letter' earlier on the online news here... HORRIFIED as WHY. WHY? IMO

 

[HarmonyE.]

JURY INTERVIEWS.....I have watched some of these. Juror 11 is talking the most and I am concerned she is going to go a bit too far and reveal things from inside the deliberation room. Last night with TB she commented about talking about who people were in the galley on the respective sides with another juror and when TB asked when she dialed it back but it was clearly during the trial. She is getting threats and frankly I think she should stop the interviews and social media games. Enough. She could have some really bad results if she continues. The Canton area is toxic and she is feeding right into that mentality. I find her smart and engaging for sure but I have heard enough. Free speech is one thing but she has a family and should be happy to resume her life. The jurors that are remaining silent are smart.

She has every right to speak out. And I think it makes sense for her to do it in the open so everyone can see what's going on. She's an immigrant to this country and the X goons were going to be attacking her with threats of ICE either way. Best to have this sort of thing out in the open where it can be seen more clearly. Would I do it, no? But she doesn't have to curb her First Amendment rights for anyone, and she's chosen not to hide in the shadows.

 

[Mmcgirl13]

Ted Daniel
@TedDanielnews


Good morning. This is the statement from Special Prosecutor Hank Brennan on the Karen Read verdict:“I am disappointed in the verdict and the fact that we could not achieve justice for John O’Keefe and his family. District Attorney Michael Morrissey appointed me, giving me full discretion to independently assess the case and follow the evidence no matter where it led. After an independent and thorough review of all the evidence, I concluded that the evidence led to one person, and only one person. Neither the closed federal investigation nor my independent review led me to identify any other possible suspect or person responsible for the death of John O’Keefe.The campaign of intimidation and abuse that has been waged, funded, and promoted in public and on social media is the antithesis of justice. If this type of conduct becomes commonplace, it will threaten the integrity of our judicial system, affecting both victims and criminally accused.We cannot condone witness abuse, causing participants to worry for their own safety or that of their families. It is my hope that with the verdict, the witnesses and their families will be left alone. The harassment of these innocent victims and family members is deplorable and should never happen again in a case in this Commonwealth.My heartfelt condolences to the O’Keefe family and faith that over the coming years they will find peace and closure.”Hank Brennan


8:03 AM · Jun 23, 2025

https://twitter.com/x/status/1937134441505096022

It’s the lack of accountability here that really gets me. You can believe that you got the right person and still acknowledge that major mistakes were made both by the CW (the holes in the shirt testimony, bringing this to trial TWICE in the first place, blowing what seems to have been the majority of your budget on ONE case) and the investigators (*gestures to everything*)

 

[MerlinFalcon]

JURY INTERVIEWS.....I have watched some of these. Juror 11 is talking the most and I am concerned she is going to go a bit too far and reveal things from inside the deliberation room. Last night with TB she commented about talking about who people were in the galley on the respective sides with another juror and when TB asked when she dialed it back but it was clearly during the trial. She is getting threats and frankly I think she should stop the interviews and social media games. Enough. She could have some really bad results if she continues. The Canton area is toxic and she is feeding right into that mentality. I find her smart and engaging for sure but I have heard enough. Free speech is one thing but she has a family and should be happy to resume her life. The jurors that are remaining silent are smart.

I worry for her safety. I am so glad we as Canadians aren’t allowed to speak as jurors. That allows us to just focus on the job at hand and be anonymous whether we want to or not. The one juror in the Lori Vallow case when she was convicted of killing her husband almost blew it by making comments that indicated he had knowledge of things during the deliberation period.

 

[turaj]

I worry for her safety. I am so glad we as Canadians aren’t allowed to speak as jurors. That allows us to just focus on the job at hand and be anonymous whether we want to or not. The one juror in the Lori Vallow case when she was convicted of killing her husband almost blew it by making comments that indicated he had knowledge of things during the deliberation period.

I too worry for her safety. Just because you have the right to speak out and reveal so much does not mean you should. She mentioned last night in the interview that of course she is from Brazil and her husband is muslim. Not sure that info on husband are important? I also worry she will say too much...she has gone close already. She was also commenting in detail about individual jurors and stopped short of too much. But as this goes along you can be sure CW watching every word from her hoping to catch something that could be a problem.

 

[waldojabba]

Ted Daniel
@TedDanielnews


Good morning. This is the statement from Special Prosecutor Hank Brennan on the Karen Read verdict:“I am disappointed in the verdict and the fact that we could not achieve justice for John O’Keefe and his family. District Attorney Michael Morrissey appointed me, giving me full discretion to independently assess the case and follow the evidence no matter where it led. After an independent and thorough review of all the evidence, I concluded that the evidence led to one person, and only one person. Neither the closed federal investigation nor my independent review led me to identify any other possible suspect or person responsible for the death of John O’Keefe.The campaign of intimidation and abuse that has been waged, funded, and promoted in public and on social media is the antithesis of justice. If this type of conduct becomes commonplace, it will threaten the integrity of our judicial system, affecting both victims and criminally accused.We cannot condone witness abuse, causing participants to worry for their own safety or that of their families. It is my hope that with the verdict, the witnesses and their families will be left alone. The harassment of these innocent victims and family members is deplorable and should never happen again in a case in this Commonwealth.My heartfelt condolences to the O’Keefe family and faith that over the coming years they will find peace and closure.”Hank Brennan


8:03 AM · Jun 23, 2025

https://twitter.com/x/status/1937134441505096022

Talk about sour grapes and lack of class - As we know from experience that's HB for you. If he had the evidence that pointed to KR being guilty - Well Hank, where is it . He certainly did not present it at trial.

Seems Hank followed the evidence no matter where it led - just not into the garage or the house on fairview.

The motions he filed to supress evidence and keep pertinent evidence and xpert witness out of that courtroom were seemingly endless and daily.

Hank you lost. Big Time. YOU. LOST. Nothing to do with social media or TB. You did not bring it! Period.

You are just another tone deaf guy who did a big BELLY FLOP in court for the world to see.

You even became confused about your role/identity nearing the end of the trial - Prosecutor /Defense/Prosector which was it ? Kind of like Norman Bates' confusion about his mother ...Mother /Norman?Mother ?

Hank, Take a seat

JMO

 

[ShadyLady]

I'm just listening to Sarah levinson's testimony in trial 1 she has said JMC phone was charging in the wall behind her so how did Jen do these butt dials?
22.46

Oh ya....I forgot about that....really so many ways to prove Jen, BA and BH lies.