MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #7

[seekingjustice**]

As of now, this is my current understanding:

Based on the evidence so far, KR admits to dropping JO off at the location where he died. There is no testimony indicating that JO ever entered the residence. Additionally, KR affirmed in one police report that she did not witness him entering the home. KR proceeded to drive to JO's residence and sent him heated text messages (which were not admitted as evidence). Her state of mind at the time appears to have been one of anger and intoxication. Several hours later, KR woke up JO's niece in a state of panic, requesting her to call one of JO's friends. At some point, KR seems to have checked her tail light, as she made comments about it being damaged. She repeatedly asked various individuals, 'Did I hit him?' or stated, 'I hit him.' Notably, KR seems to know the precise location of JO's body beneath the snow. Subsequently, her vehicle was seized as evidence around 5:30 pm due to her remarks about the possibility of hitting him. Meanwhile, as the car was being towed to police headquarters, first responders and police at the scene of the incident discovered red plastic fragments resembling KR's broken tail light."

I'm hoping to see evidence regarding JO's phone data, KR telematics data and hopefully the ME's report along with testimony from a reconstruction expert witness.

 

[HarmonyE.]

As of now, this is my current understanding:

Based on the evidence so far, KR admits to dropping JO off at the location where he died. There is no testimony indicating that JO ever entered the residence. Additionally, KR affirmed in one police report that she did not witness him entering the home. KR proceeded to drive to JO's residence and sent him heated text messages (which were not admitted as evidence). Her state of mind at the time appears to have been one of anger and intoxication. Several hours later, KR woke up JO's niece in a state of panic, requesting her to call one of JO's friends. At some point, KR seems to have checked her tail light, as she made comments about it being damaged. She repeatedly asked various individuals, 'Did I hit him?' or stated, 'I hit him.' Notably, KR seems to know the precise location of JO's body beneath the snow. Subsequently, her vehicle was seized as evidence around 5:30 pm due to her remarks about the possibility of hitting him. Meanwhile, as the car was being towed to police headquarters, first responders and police at the scene of the incident discovered red plastic fragments resembling KR's broken tail light."

I'm hoping to see evidence regarding JO's phone data, KR telematics data and hopefully the ME's report along with testimony from a reconstruction expert witness.

You've basically recited the prosecution's version of events thus far.

The defense story is very different.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

I have a question — didn’t Lally imply in openings that KR deleted ring footage?

 

[seekingjustice**]

You've basically recited the prosecution's version of events thus far.

The defense story is very different.

Agree: "This currently represents the tangible evidence so far. The Defense has presented a narrative devoid of substantiated facts at this point."

 

[sunspun]

I've seen many posts referring to the police bodycam video where KR was being booked in to jail by Bukhenik, and people seem confused by this, and I think that was the Pros.'s intention by them releasing only the snippet of that video that they played in court, where KR says, "We're all in on the same joke, right?..." etc.

There actually is more to that video. But from what I've seen posted, it sounds to me like most people haven't heard any more than that part they played in court.

But I knew I'd heard more of it, so I looked on youtube and found one by True Crime TV from 4/14/24, that shows quite a bit more of what was said before that one part. I guess I can post a link here?

(remove if not!)

Karen Read Bodycam Booking " I cracked a taillight and John was pulverized"​

There's a transcript provided with this video:

the the house the door just did the the
0:02
KN um BL okay

Um can you explain to me
0:06
what the process is right now?
Absolutely.
0:08
So you're going to be uh PL just like
0:11
last time uh go through the same process.
0:13
It's going to be a little less uh time-
0:16
consuming, we're not going to do major
0:17
case prints cuz we did those last time.
0:20
Um once you're booked and you go through
0:25
this portion of it, we uh let you make a
0:29
phone call just like last time. You make a
0:31
phone call, uh your parents will be able
0:34
to bring you whatever other
0:37
additional things that you need
0:40
yeah and then um and then tomorrow
0:42
morning um you'll go and be arraigned for
0:46
superior court on the charges that were
0:48
I'm sure he'll go over the charges again
0:50
with on warrant.

But I'm on bail, so how can I
0:52
be spending the night here again?
0:54
All right so I'll explain that portion to
0:56
you as long as it's not going to
0:58
interfere with you -- are you ready to go?
1:01
Yeah I'm just waiting for Rams here. Okay! So
1:05
um initially your arrest was on probable
1:07
cause out of uh the district court okay
1:10
so the charges that you were arrested on
1:12
initially were out of District Court out
1:14
of Sten District that's where the Arraignment
1:16
was who uh District level Charges um
1:21
today grand jury indicted you on these charges,
1:24
which is second degree
1:26
murder, vehicular homicide and um leaving the scene
1:30
of a death okay, so those are the charges
1:33
that grand jury indicted you on. so now you're being
1:35
charged and will be arraigned in Superior
1:37
Court County Superior Court in De
1:41
okay? So bail doesn't apply anymore? uh
1:45
typically I I'm not so we don't set the
1:47
bail but typically once murder comes
1:49
into play people don't get bailed out.So
1:51
it's not manslaughter anymore? is that
1:53
the difference? that's correct it's a
1:54
higher degree of taking a life okay so
1:58
those that's the charges being charged
2:01
with now and you were indicted on by
2:04
Grand Jury. Okay you're aware he was beaten
2:07
up by
2:11
Brian and Colin Albert, I mean we're all in on the same
2:14
joke
2:15
right? my tail light was cracked and John
2:18
was pulverized. Okay you you need to uh
2:23
abide by the the the rights that were
2:26
afforded to you okay so you can you can
2:29
talk if you want
2:30
if you want to tell us what happened
2:32
that's fine we'll listen but you were read
2:34
your rights okay and and I'm sure he's going
2:36
to do it again all right if you want to
2:38
talk to us you want to give us give us
2:42
um a story definitely we'll take it. I don't
2:47
I mean I know you already know the story
2:48
so I want my
2:52
[Music]
2:53
to now that it's
[END]

That format's not easy to read, sorry.

Basically, what I got out of it was that this is when KR has been brought BACK in to the booking area at the precinct, even though she was already previously booked in and had to post bail and was released, so she's confused about why she's back there again and why she can't leave, since she already posted bail.

But the officer (Bukhenik) tells her he can explain that. It's because her charges have now been upgraded from manslaughter to murder, after they held a grand jury on it, and they voted to indict her on murder charges at the grand jury. He also tells her that murder is usually not a bailable charge. (So my paraphrase: when it was just manslaughter, she was allowed to go home on bail. Now that it's a murder charge, she may not be granted bail. She certainly has no bail at that moment, at least. So she's being booked in to stay, indefinitely, until/unless something changes.)

I understood it as that this was the first KR had ever heard that she was now charged with murder, not just manslaughter, but that's my assumption.

I don't know if this adds anything to this discussion or helps clear anything up, but I just wanted to fill in the known conversation they had before the one comment by KR that we heard in court, because I have still never seen any of this reported or discussed since part of this video was played in court. I'm not trying to put my own interpretation on this or explain any of it... Just adding some context. And context is always good. IMO!

 

[shotgun09]

I have a question — didn’t Lally imply in openings that KR deleted ring footage?

I fell asleep during his opening.

 

[HarmonyE.]

Agree: "This currently represents the tangible evidence so far. The Defense has presented a narrative devoid of substantiated facts at this point."

Don't understand. The defense hasn't even presented their case yet. And they've done an amazing job cross examining the prosecutions' witnesses.

 

[bobbymkii]

I have a question — didn’t Lally imply in openings that KR deleted ring footage?

I don't know. All I could hear was brrrr bumble bumble what if anything brumble bumble

 

[cocomod]

Agree: "This currently represents the tangible evidence so far. The Defense has presented a narrative devoid of substantiated facts at this point."

The defense hasn’t presented their side yet.

The prosecution has yet to prove that JO died by Karen’s vehicle. They have yet to even show how that was possible. They haven’t shown any tangible evidence that a vehicle killed JO. Just words without evidence - especially since their evidence was never logged and there is ZERO proof of chain of custody. I’m sorry - with what very little they have presented, there is waaaaaaay too much reasonable doubt

 

[LvsAMystry]

I don't know. All I could hear was brrrr bumble bumble what if anything brumble bumble

Looooooooong Sigh

 

[bobbymkii]

Looooooooong Sigh

It's a serious problem though. How on earth are the jury supposed to reach a fair verdict if they don't know what question the witness is answering because the prosecutor is barely audible?

They had to move to different courtroom because jurors couldn't see the witnesses from the jury box... into a courtroom where they can't hear them unless they turn the fans/AC off.

Hear Ye Hear Ye. Or See ye See ye. Apparently jurors in Norfolk County,MA can't have both!

edit: punctuation

 

[HarmonyE.]

Looooooooong Sigh

What, if anything, is causing those sighs?

 

[themonk]

I've always thought that she appears to be deeply uncomfortable with the entire premise of the defense case which involves very serious allegations against emergency first responders in the county in which she serves, and it is affecting her decision making in this case.

While I am still awaiting the pathological and reconstruction evidence to reach a final decision myself. If that gets as thoroughly and flamboyantly debunked as the eyewitness/LE evidence has so far (JMO) there is a very real possibility that there is no case to answer here.

I'm actually starting to wonder if getting a guilty verdict against KR is no longer the main priority of the Norfolk County DA's office, and the longer Karen Read is indicted on these charges, the longer they have no obligation to investigate anyone else or let the case go cold.

RBBM

The main priority of the system is protecting the system.

 

[bobbymkii]

What, if anything, is causing those sighs?

I honestly didn't expect this trial to produce so many LOL moments. I do like to make and appreciate humorous comments in trials to lighten the mood in what is an otherwise very serious matter, so long as they're not at the expense of the victim or their family (which none of the humour I have seen in any of these threads has crossed)

edit: spelling

 

[themonk]

Obviously, I think she will be found guilty.
I have great faith in common sense and jurors seeing through the smoke & mirrors when all is said & done.

What are you willing to wager?

 

[seekingjustice**]

The defense hasn’t presented their side yet.

The prosecution has yet to prove that JO died by Karen’s vehicle. They have yet to even show how that was possible. They haven’t shown any tangible evidence that a vehicle killed JO. Just words without evidence - especially since their evidence was never logged and there is ZERO proof of chain of custody. I’m sorry - with what very little they have presented, there is waaaaaaay too much reasonable doubt

Her tail light couldn't have been deliberately placed near the body, as the vehicle had just been retrieved from her address when the initial broken pieces of the taillight were discovered. Therefore, if it wasn't intentionally placed, it must have originated directly from Karen while she was driving. That's evidence right there IMO.

 

[LvsAMystry]

What, if anything, is causing those sighs?

When, if anytime, will be ever stop rambling?

 

[LvsAMystry]

I honestly didn't expect this trial to produce so many LOL moments. I do like to make and appreciate humorous comments in trials to lighten the mood in what is an otherwise very serious matter, so long as they're not at the expense of the victim or their family (which none of the humour I have seen in any of these threads has crossed)

edit: spelling

My very fav moment thus far was last week when Lally was frantically shuffling through papers to find something and had a very loud hot mic moment “Jesus Christ”

 

[Wishbone]

Her tail light couldn't have been deliberately placed near the body, as the vehicle had just been retrieved from her address when the initial broken pieces of the taillight were discovered. Therefore, if it wasn't intentionally placed, it must have originated directly from Karen while she was driving. That's evidence right there IMO.

I'm still trying to find the chain of evidence on the pieces of plastic collected on that date and see when they went to the lab. I would really like to know. If it was days or weeks after jan 29 and proctor had control of them anything could have happened. Vallier got the pieces collected on feb 3 delivered by officer dicicco. Those were the first pieces of plastic submitted as far as I know. The jan 29 pieces must have come in at a later time. Hoping to find whatever testimony I missed regarding the first pieces found but there was no mention of pieces collected jan 29 that I heard in her testimony. Hope somebody can fill me in. JMOO

 

[MyJoey]

None of the evidence shows she hit him, accidentally or on purpose. If you've watched the trial you must know that the Commonwealth still hasn't even come up with a theory to try to sell how they claim Read did it. No reconstructionist, no lead investigator.

I've asked you several times now what you think caused those arm injuries and the corresponding puncture marks on JO's sweatshirt, but you never seem to want to tackle the physical evidence related to John's body. But the jury will.

Michael Proctor is a very bad cop. He's done some really bad things here and will end up in prison when this is all said and done. But you're of course free to vouch for him. Endlessly.

But honestly, none of the evidence shows he was in the house either. You can point out all the inconsistencies but …..Karen’s own words everyone seems to sweep under the rug. We will see what the CW has to say in the weeks ahead. No way giving the investigation a pass or MP they did a horrible job. MP is still on the job even under investigation, that’s my understanding. Higgins is on desk duty, you would think MP would be the same.