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

[House of Holden]

One part I liked (towards the beginning IIRC) was he forgot JM’s name. He was like “Jen……….uh………..McCabe.” I guess it could’ve been a brain fart but I was suspicious that he was trying to look like he barely knew her.

Yes I noticed that also! I said the same thing to my husband - "look at him acting like he doesn't know anyone".......

 

[Izzylizzy]

What exactly did Dever originally say (& to whom) and when and how did she backtrack her original statement? TIA

Her attitude was remarkable!

Dever told this to the FB and said it was a "weirdly long time"
I
Scroll down for more about her testimony;

"Jackson said what Dever told the law enforcement agents in August of 2023 was that she recalled seeing Higgins at the station that Saturday, and thought it was weird that Higgins and Berkowitz were inside the sally port alone with Read's car for such a long time.

"Do you remember making that statement to the officers?"

JUN 210:28 AM EDT

Dever now being cross examined about her involvement in Read case​

cont

Recap: Karen Read jury hears from Proctor friend, ex-Canton officer, dog bite expert

Karen Read's murder trial is in its seventh week, with a childhood fried of Michael Proctor, a former Canton police officer and a dog bite expert testifying Monday.

www.nbcboston.com

 

[Florida_marlin]

She said she saw Cheif Berkowicz and Brian Higgins in the sallyport the night of January 29th while Karen's Lexus was there and they spent a weird amount of time in there. Then later she said she was shown the car got there after her shift ended so she couldn't have possibly seen what she said she saw or thought she saw. It was strange.

Another lying LE in this case

 

[Florida_marlin]

Her

Dever told this to the FB
I
Scroll down for more about her testimony;

"Jackson said what Dever told the law enforcement agents in August of 2023 was that she recalled seeing Higgins at the station that Saturday, and thought it was weird that Higgins and Berkowitz were inside the sally port alone with Read's car for such a long time.

"Do you remember making that statement to the officers?"

JUN 210:28 AM EDT

Dever now being cross examined about her involvement in Read case​

cont

Recap: Karen Read jury hears from Proctor friend, ex-Canton officer, dog bite expert

Karen Read's murder trial is in its seventh week, with a childhood fried of Michael Proctor, a former Canton police officer and a dog bite expert testifying Monday.

www.nbcboston.com

Her whole testimony was ridiculous. She should have just answered each question “conspiracy!”. It wouldn’t have been anymore obvious.

 

[Florida_marlin]

Question: there’s copious evidence that we have all seen with our own eyes that Karen was a victim of a frame up. Can we assign her victim status on WS now?

 

[Warwick7]

so her backing up 34 feet should be ignored? If Richard green’s shoddy affidavit never existed..this movement would’ve never taken off..

Do you have a link for it being shoddy?

 

[Warwick7]

The phone and car data show they were in the same area… because she dropped him off. That was never in dispute. What is in dispute is whether he was struck by her car, and for that, no, the data doesn’t prove anything close to guilt. No accident reconstruction evidence. No injuries consistent with being hit by a car. No blood, no glass transfer, no damage to her vehicle consistent with any stroke. So unless your “proof” is vibes and speculation, the evidence just doesn’t support the CW’s theory. I’m very thankful we had 12 reasonable jurors who saw that. MOO.

Also, ETA re: phone data… John’s phone temp didn’t change at all from 1:36 to 6:06 am. It stayed at 50 degrees for hours in a blizzard? Doubtful, IMO

Excellent post!!

 

[missy1974]

oh gosh... I hate to post this because of who it is.. BUT.. he got the note taker to answer some questions!!!! he would have voted NOT GUILTY... and his answers are GREAT!

So many things that most of us had said and questioned ourselves!

The formatting is mine... it copied horrible and could have used an edit before he posted:

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can’t speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do, it’s luck of the draw. 6 of us had to be alternates.)

how would you have voted?
I would have voted NG for all charges except maybe the OUI. I think she was drunk in the morning. they tested her in the am….but that doesn’t prove she was drunk when she left the bar, because she easily could’ve gone home and drank.

– how was Hank Brennan?
hank was very focused. very determined. he did a great job at crossing Sergeant Barros. he definitely tripped him up and got him confused on the pictures…but at times hank came across as just rude. saying “over here!” to witnesses was way over the line. and the thing with holes in the back in the hoodie. that really hurt his credibility.


-how was blue paint?
honestly my head was spinning. I thought it was a joke. I couldn’t believe a “forensic expert” would do something so silly. all it did was demonstrate that if you (intentionally) put your bare skin against wet paint, the paint will transfer to your skin. I dont know how anyone could think that was a smart thing for the prosecution to show.


-what was wrong with case?
there were some glaring holes for the prosecution. to name just a few:
1. hank kept portraying KR’s statements at the scene as an admission. but that doesn’t add up. if KR “admitted” to killing a cop, why didn’t any of the cops on scene arrest her? or even detain and question her? or put it in their reports? there’s an officer down, and there’s woman yelling her admission for emergency reponders to hear, but by coincidence not a single cop heard it or thought to write it down? that’s odd, right?

2. no consistent explanation for injuries. no medical doctors would say that a car was involved. if he was on the lawn from 1230 to 6am, where was the frostbite? the state just ignored this. why? I’m not a true crime guy. i don’t know about other murder trials but maybe you do, john. is it normal for the state to charge someone with murder when their own medical examiner can’t/won’t call it a homicide? is it normal for the state to not call the main detective? now consider: is it normal for BOTH of those things to happen in a murder trial? common sense would suggest no way. that’s MASSIVE doubt.


-what did defense do well?
defense did a good job of establishing reasonable doubt. especially with trooper bukhenik. he was so defensive. I kept asking myself: why are the police so defensive/evasive here? and not just bukhenik.


-who were good witnesses?
the scientists from arcca were convincing. and when they were cross examined, they didn’t get defensive or snippy. (contrast with so many of the witnesses for the prosecution.) Brian Loughran was maybe the most convincing. at least for me. I was born in Norwood when JFK was president and have lived in Massachusetts my whole life. I’ve shoveled more driveways than I care to remember haha… if there was a body laying on an inch or two of snow just off the road, theres no way the plow driver would miss it, right? unless the plow guy was drunk or had skipped his route.


– who were bad witnesses?
Jen McCabe: too many things didn’t make sense. especially she forgot who she called when those other agents asked her?
Kerry Roberts: she kind of admitted to lying at the grand jury. she said she didn’t do it on purpose. but still: it made me wonder, why is the state calling someone who lied at the grand jury?
the Boston cop Dever: she didn’t want to answer ANYTHING ha-ha. its kind of funny in hindsight but at the time it made me think: why is a POLICEWOMAN so reluctant to say whether or not there were cameras at her police station?

Karen Read juror exclusive: note taker alternate juror 17 Karen Read trial - John DePetro Show

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can't speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do,

depetro.com

 

[Malleeboy]

I wonder if the McAlbert's will ever try and explain properly their odd and erratic behavior on the 29th.

Jen's 6 but dials and answers are just unbelievable.
Jen's answered phone call to her sister, which she testified wasn't a conversation but lasted 38 secs.
The butt dial conversation between Higgins and Albert.
Higgins justification for his action at the police station.
Can we get someone to find Cloe/Clara and measure her teeth bite.
Can the full FBI investigation be released.

 

[Born2BWild]

Karen Read Juror Says He Felt She Was Innocent

Forget reasonable doubt, one of the jurors who voted to acquit Karen Read of a murder charge in her retrial says he felt she was completely innocent.

www.tmz.com

Juror No. 4, a man named Jason, joined us on "TMZ Live" Thursday

Juror #4 gave a great summary of how their decision was made.

 

[Snoods]

oh gosh... I hate to post this because of who it is.. BUT.. he got the note taker to answer some questions!!!! he would have voted NOT GUILTY... and his answers are GREAT!

So many things that most of us had said and questioned ourselves!

The formatting is mine... it copied horrible and could have used an edit before he posted:

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can’t speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do, it’s luck of the draw. 6 of us had to be alternates.)

how would you have voted?
I would have voted NG for all charges except maybe the OUI. I think she was drunk in the morning. they tested her in the am….but that doesn’t prove she was drunk when she left the bar, because she easily could’ve gone home and drank.

– how was Hank Brennan?
hank was very focused. very determined. he did a great job at crossing Sergeant Barros. he definitely tripped him up and got him confused on the pictures…but at times hank came across as just rude. saying “over here!” to witnesses was way over the line. and the thing with holes in the back in the hoodie. that really hurt his credibility.


-how was blue paint?
honestly my head was spinning. I thought it was a joke. I couldn’t believe a “forensic expert” would do something so silly. all it did was demonstrate that if you (intentionally) put your bare skin against wet paint, the paint will transfer to your skin. I dont know how anyone could think that was a smart thing for the prosecution to show.


-what was wrong with case?
there were some glaring holes for the prosecution. to name just a few:
1. hank kept portraying KR’s statements at the scene as an admission. but that doesn’t add up. if KR “admitted” to killing a cop, why didn’t any of the cops on scene arrest her? or even detain and question her? or put it in their reports? there’s an officer down, and there’s woman yelling her admission for emergency reponders to hear, but by coincidence not a single cop heard it or thought to write it down? that’s odd, right?

2. no consistent explanation for injuries. no medical doctors would say that a car was involved. if he was on the lawn from 1230 to 6am, where was the frostbite? the state just ignored this. why? I’m not a true crime guy. i don’t know about other murder trials but maybe you do, john. is it normal for the state to charge someone with murder when their own medical examiner can’t/won’t call it a homicide? is it normal for the state to not call the main detective? now consider: is it normal for BOTH of those things to happen in a murder trial? common sense would suggest no way. that’s MASSIVE doubt.


-what did defense do well?
defense did a good job of establishing reasonable doubt. especially with trooper bukhenik. he was so defensive. I kept asking myself: why are the police so defensive/evasive here? and not just bukhenik.


-who were good witnesses?
the scientists from arcca were convincing. and when they were cross examined, they didn’t get defensive or snippy. (contrast with so many of the witnesses for the prosecution.) Brian Loughran was maybe the most convincing. at least for me. I was born in Norwood when JFK was president and have lived in Massachusetts my whole life. I’ve shoveled more driveways than I care to remember haha… if there was a body laying on an inch or two of snow just off the road, theres no way the plow driver would miss it, right? unless the plow guy was drunk or had skipped his route.


– who were bad witnesses?
Jen McCabe: too many things didn’t make sense. especially she forgot who she called when those other agents asked her?
Kerry Roberts: she kind of admitted to lying at the grand jury. she said she didn’t do it on purpose. but still: it made me wonder, why is the state calling someone who lied at the grand jury?
the Boston cop Dever: she didn’t want to answer ANYTHING ha-ha. its kind of funny in hindsight but at the time it made me think: why is a POLICEWOMAN so reluctant to say whether or not there were cameras at her police station?

Karen Read juror exclusive: note taker alternate juror 17 Karen Read trial - John DePetro Show

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can't speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do,

depetro.com

Hahaha he thought the blue man was a joke and couldn’t believe Hank put forth such a witness. He basically confirmed everything (most of) us here were saying and thinking. I feel so validated lol. What a shame he missed out on being a juror.

I wish someone would ask if they had an inkling ARCCA was hired by the FBI and if they thought Chloe bit him.

 

[Alcina]

Hahaha he thought the blue man was a joke and couldn’t believe Hank put forth such a witness. He basically confirmed everything (most of) us were saying and thinking here. I feel so validated lol. What a shame he missed out on being a juror.

I wish someone would ask if they had an inkling ARRCA was hired by the FBI and if they thought Chloe bit him.

Those are two of the questions I'm wondering about also.

 

[turaj]

I just got here and scanned a few pages and I don't think LYK was posted.
I'm going to listen now.

the juror was very careful in his answers as he should be. I simply still don't understand why the one was sealed and called back? Does anyone understand his answer. I felt like they were told something by the judge about talking about this and to just say it was the same.

 

[louvillian08]

Another interview with a juror:

My Exclusive Interview with Karen Read Juror Number 11

Ten questions with Juror Paula Prado.

jessmachadoshow.substack.com

"What witness did you trust the least?

Officer Kelly Dever—her behavior in court made me question whether it’s safe for someone who acts like that to be carrying a gun among civilians."

"We didn’t fail the O’Keefes. The Commonwealth did. The police did."

 

[Snoods]

Another interview with a juror:

My Exclusive Interview with Karen Read Juror Number 11

Ten questions with Juror Paula Prado.

jessmachadoshow.substack.com

"What witness did you trust the least?

Officer Kelly Dever—her behavior in court made me question whether it’s safe for someone who acts like that to be carrying a gun among civilians."

"We didn’t fail the O’Keefes. The Commonwealth did. The police did."

Well here we go.

Did you believe the injuries to John O’Keefe’s arm were caused by a dog?

Yes—and I actually have my own theory about the dog’s role in his death. I don’t see those injuries coming from a taillight at all. Plus, the lack of more injuries on his body made it really hard to believe a collision occurred.

Did you know that the ARCCA witnesses were first contacted by the FBI?

No. I only assumed it was the FBI after one of the witnesses before ARCCA mentioned “another agency.”

I’m gobbling up these juror interviews.

 

[geevee]

oh gosh... I hate to post this because of who it is.. BUT.. he got the note taker to answer some questions!!!! he would have voted NOT GUILTY... and his answers are GREAT!

So many things that most of us had said and questioned ourselves!

The formatting is mine... it copied horrible and could have used an edit before he posted:

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can’t speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do, it’s luck of the draw. 6 of us had to be alternates.)

how would you have voted?
I would have voted NG for all charges except maybe the OUI. I think she was drunk in the morning. they tested her in the am….but that doesn’t prove she was drunk when she left the bar, because she easily could’ve gone home and drank.

– how was Hank Brennan?
hank was very focused. very determined. he did a great job at crossing Sergeant Barros. he definitely tripped him up and got him confused on the pictures…but at times hank came across as just rude. saying “over here!” to witnesses was way over the line. and the thing with holes in the back in the hoodie. that really hurt his credibility.


-how was blue paint?
honestly my head was spinning. I thought it was a joke. I couldn’t believe a “forensic expert” would do something so silly. all it did was demonstrate that if you (intentionally) put your bare skin against wet paint, the paint will transfer to your skin. I dont know how anyone could think that was a smart thing for the prosecution to show.


-what was wrong with case?
there were some glaring holes for the prosecution. to name just a few:
1. hank kept portraying KR’s statements at the scene as an admission. but that doesn’t add up. if KR “admitted” to killing a cop, why didn’t any of the cops on scene arrest her? or even detain and question her? or put it in their reports? there’s an officer down, and there’s woman yelling her admission for emergency reponders to hear, but by coincidence not a single cop heard it or thought to write it down? that’s odd, right?

2. no consistent explanation for injuries. no medical doctors would say that a car was involved. if he was on the lawn from 1230 to 6am, where was the frostbite? the state just ignored this. why? I’m not a true crime guy. i don’t know about other murder trials but maybe you do, john. is it normal for the state to charge someone with murder when their own medical examiner can’t/won’t call it a homicide? is it normal for the state to not call the main detective? now consider: is it normal for BOTH of those things to happen in a murder trial? common sense would suggest no way. that’s MASSIVE doubt.


-what did defense do well?
defense did a good job of establishing reasonable doubt. especially with trooper bukhenik. he was so defensive. I kept asking myself: why are the police so defensive/evasive here? and not just bukhenik.


-who were good witnesses?
the scientists from arcca were convincing. and when they were cross examined, they didn’t get defensive or snippy. (contrast with so many of the witnesses for the prosecution.) Brian Loughran was maybe the most convincing. at least for me. I was born in Norwood when JFK was president and have lived in Massachusetts my whole life. I’ve shoveled more driveways than I care to remember haha… if there was a body laying on an inch or two of snow just off the road, theres no way the plow driver would miss it, right? unless the plow guy was drunk or had skipped his route.


– who were bad witnesses?
Jen McCabe: too many things didn’t make sense. especially she forgot who she called when those other agents asked her?
Kerry Roberts: she kind of admitted to lying at the grand jury. she said she didn’t do it on purpose. but still: it made me wonder, why is the state calling someone who lied at the grand jury?
the Boston cop Dever: she didn’t want to answer ANYTHING ha-ha. its kind of funny in hindsight but at the time it made me think: why is a POLICEWOMAN so reluctant to say whether or not there were cameras at her police station?

Karen Read juror exclusive: note taker alternate juror 17 Karen Read trial - John DePetro Show

I was not a deliberating juror, so I can't speak to what the 12 deliberators were told. (As for being an alternate, I have to confess to being very letdown when Jim called my number! he called 3 other numbers before 17. I thought I was going to get thru. But what can you do,

depetro.com

I love this guy! Too bad he did not get to deliberate, he seems to have taken it well but that must have been tough.

 

[Izzylizzy]

the juror was very careful in his answers as he should be. I simply still don't understand why the one was sealed and called back? Does anyone understand his answer. I felt like they were told something by the judge about talking about this and to just say it was the same.

The juror never explained it and Peter guessed that they were going to discuss it more and that was that.
Can a verdict form be filled out then before it reaches the judge the jury asks for it take back?
???

imo

 

[Izzylizzy]

Peter with Ted Daniel
Boston 25

 

[Izzylizzy]

I love this guy! Too bad he did not get to deliberate, he seems to have taken it well but that must have been tough.

He was a clear thinker and sharing what he thought is welcome info.
I won't touch the mystery of why of all people did he choose John DePetro who had KR guilty, guilty and guilty.

IMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

Another interview with a juror:

My Exclusive Interview with Karen Read Juror Number 11

Ten questions with Juror Paula Prado.

jessmachadoshow.substack.com

"What witness did you trust the least?

Officer Kelly Dever—her behavior in court made me question whether it’s safe for someone who acts like that to be carrying a gun among civilians."

"We didn’t fail the O’Keefes. The Commonwealth did. The police did."

Thanks!
The best interviews yet from this one and DePetros.
It appears that she had practiced law in another country (Brazil?).
She certainly paid attention to the witnesses and evidence presented.
So far Jess is the only one who asked about the judge.
imo