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

[Lilibet]

In my opinion the cold hard facts were ignored and disregarded by that jury. MOO

The evidence I believe the jurors disregarded, in my opinion.

Why would the jurors ignore and disregard evidence? It sounds as if you are saying that the jurors behaved dishonorably. I hope you’re not.

 

[sunshineray]

I've explained it ad nauseam in the threads, so I won't be listing things. It's my opinion there was a miscarriage of justice for the victim JO. You are also entitled to your opinion. We disagree greatly.

 

[sunshineray]

Many of those same jurors who are being disrespected are now saying not only NG, but others need to be investigated. They saw this non-evidence against KR and it was justly repudiated. We can all be happy with and respect clear headed and diligent, hard working jurors.

I couldn't disagree with you more, respectfully.

 

[sunshineray]

Why would the jurors ignore and disregard evidence? It sounds as if you are saying that the jurors behaved dishonorably. I hope you’re not.

Yes I actually do think the jurors disregarded clear evidence of her guilt, it's my opinion.

 

[sapphire blue]

Yes I actually do think the jurors disregarded clear evidence of her guilt, it's my opinion.

What evidence are you claiming they disregarded? they didn’t disregard tail light evidence as seen on camera and seen by a police officer from a different force, they didn’t disregard the experts evidence that JOs injuries were NOT consistent with being hit by a motor vehicle.

 

[Seattle1]

What evidence are you claiming they disregarded? they didn’t disregard tail light evidence as seen on camera and seen by a police officer from a different force, they didn’t disregard the experts evidence that JOs injuries were NOT consistent with being hit by a motor vehicle.

Nor did the jurors ignore the State Medical Examiner who did NOT rule JOK's manner of death a homicide. The State has paid experts more than half a million dollars over two trials to present evidence to prove otherwise and the manner of death remains unchanged! Science doesn't lie.

 

[rescuemom]

Not what happened with OJ in civil court, he was found culpable.

Because he was guilty of murdering both victims

 

[Dawookie]

The evidence I believe the jurors disregarded, in my opinion.

They didn't ignore any evidence at all. There's not a single piece of evidence that points to him being hit by a vehicle. The tail light "evidence" was a complete joke and was clearly manipulated just like the sally port video along with the investigation. What's amazing is the CW had no case, knew they had no case, still went through two different trials with the same evidence that clealry showed he wasn't hit by a car and people still somehow believe she killed him.

 

[sapphire blue]

They didn't ignore any evidence at all. There's not a single piece of evidence that points to him being hit by a vehicle. The tail light "evidence" was a complete joke and was clearly manipulated just like the sally port video along with the investigation. What's amazing is the CW had no case, knew they had no case, still went through two different trials with the same evidence that clealry showed he wasn't hit by a car and people still somehow believe she killed him.

And let’s not forget the “if she takes a plea it’ll go away, if she doesn’t it’ll become an episode”

And it certainly has been quite the episode

 

[Wishbone]

She may need to prove that in civil court and the preponderance of evidence is there against her. AJMO

And she may not have to prove anything. JMOO

 

[Florida_marlin]

She may need to prove that in civil court and the preponderance of evidence is there against her. AJMO

In the criminal court, the CW had the funding from the government, ie, the taxpayers to fund their bogus prosecution. KR had to fund herself. A David vs Goliath situation. And like in that story, luckily, David won. In the civil case, JOK’s family will have to fund the case w/o the CW’s deep pockets. Public sentiment is with KR, for good reason. Nobody likes the spectre of an unjust prosecution. It doesn’t provide any justice for the victim, JOK. In the civil case, an attorney for JOK’s family will either have to be paid big $$ from the plaintiff or decide to go pro bono with a potential cut of the winnings. In that case, any attorney that wants to get paid will rather go after the bar or some other entity than KR. Because, they will review the evidence and know they have little chance of convincing a jury of KR’s culpability since they will be unable to find ANY credible evidence that she ran over him with her Lexus. On the other hand, KR will have thousands of people who will gladly provide funding to defend her case, and, to fund lawsuits on her own. Some of us consider government tyranny, government overreach, Government protection of criminals, and downright framing as a greater threat to society than murder, as bad as murder is. So, good luck with all that. The ridiculous thing about all this crap is the bogus prosecution of KR to cover up a murder denied JOK justice. Scorched Earth for the local CW jurisdiction is called for.

 

[Dawookie]

And let’s not forget the “if she takes a plea it’ll go away, if she doesn’t it’ll become an episode”

And it certainly has been quite the episode

There's that too. The CW wasn't planning on her actually fighting the case and it showed. They Norfolk County DAs office and that MSP unit were hoping that it would be buried like the Birchmore case was and they would sweep it under the rug

 

[keek]

I've explained it ad nauseam in the threads, so I won't be listing things. It's my opinion there was a miscarriage of justice for the victim JO. You are also entitled to your opinion. We disagree greatly.

It's over, over. Time to force the hands of the Alberts and McCabe's and putting the spotlight on state corruption. It's all done, I'd focus on ongoing cases that are not over at this point, refocus as nothing will change. Lots to check out elsewhere now on ws I find. IMO

 

[keek]

They didn't ignore any evidence at all. There's not a single piece of evidence that points to him being hit by a vehicle. The tail light "evidence" was a complete joke and was clearly manipulated just like the sally port video along with the investigation. What's amazing is the CW had no case, knew they had no case, still went through two different trials with the same evidence that clealry showed he wasn't hit by a car and people still somehow believe she killed him.

The jurors were incredibly intelligent thankfully and extremely astute and aware of all the options. Nothing was left unchecked, all that work and time, I honor them as we do. The rest of us were watching, SOME, and listening and understanding, SOME, how it all works and saw justice carried out for Karen Read, NOW we need justice for JOK. IMO

 

[keek]

I've explained it ad nauseam in the threads, so I won't be listing things. It's my opinion there was a miscarriage of justice for the victim JO. You are also entitled to your opinion. We disagree greatly.

It is beyond unusually odd to read this statement from a commenter that was not on the jury or has any inside information that the jurors did not have, nor anyone with authority, non corrupt authority that is. What could it mean, opinion is an opinion and it's personal, nothing to do with actual science and facts, so it repeatedly looks repeated only, nothing to back the comment up at all, just a commenter's personal opinion, no sleuthing. IMO

 

[jepop]

And she may not have to prove anything. JMOO

Using OJ as comparison is a false equivalence. The civil suit will either be dropped or fail. Imo most legal commentators I read opine that because there was no evidence of vehicle impact presented at trial, the civil suit is literally legless.

Perhaps one day the O'Keefes will start looking towards the properly suspect individuals for answers. Jmo

 

[jepop]

Yes I actually do think the jurors disregarded clear evidence of her guilt, it's my opinion.

I still have no idea what this opinion is based on apart from a fictional narrative with no basis in fact or reality. Moo, I find it quite insulting to the jurors. I feel consistently insisting on something so entirely speculative undermines faith in the jury system, especially as those who have spoken have made abundantly clear they considered the evidence in detail and reached a verdict applying the faculty of reason to it. Jmo

 

[HarmonyE.]

A new video was posted yesterday of Alan Jackson at 34 F, not sure if the poster is approved here but you can find it on YouTube by searching 'Karen Read Attorney Alan Jackson at 34 Fairview Road, Canton'.

Even the subfloors in most of the basement were ripped out.

Unless there was a massive flood, I'm not sure why anyone would do that.

According to environmental section of realtor com for 34 Fairview "This property has no flood risk in the Flood Factor™ model"

 

[kuromiiiilove]

Yes I actually do think the jurors disregarded clear evidence of her guilt, it's my opinion.

You’re of course entitled to your opinion, but implying the jurors disregarded evidence just because the verdict didn’t align with your feelings is a bold claim, IMO. They sat through every piece of testimony, saw every exhibit, and had the legal instructions in front of them. Disagreeing is one thing… but dismissing the process just because it didn’t go your way? That’s disrespectful to the jurors. MOO.

 

[Morag]

In a more light-hearted holiday mood, I have a casting suggesting for the inevitable movie:
To play Judge Beverly Cannone: Rachel Dratch (Debbie Downer on SNL). She has a genuine Boston area accent, too, so managing sidebaaaahs should come easily for her.