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

[louvillian08]

Regarding the time stamps of the google searches: here is a video of the defense refuting the prosecution's argument - starts around the 25:50 mark.

Here are links to the best court documents I could find about this issue: Prosecution's Filing (Pages 31-32), Defense's Rebuttal (pages 4-6) - the defense's filing includes the table of google searches from the prosecution's expert's report.

After reading through those a few times and listening to the video - IMO, it sounds like the prosecution is basically (certainly simplifying things a bit here) arguing that since other websites/searches have the same time stamp, the 2:27am search comes from a suspended state tab, AND the search about "hos long to die in cold" also identically appears at 6:24am, the time stamp of the first search at 2:27am is wrong. However, as quoted in the defense's filing, the prosecution's expert says the reason for this is "unknown" and also cannot give a reason why the other searches do not appear earlier than they "actually" occurred.

In the video, the defense argues that a system of iPhone time keeping (Cocoa) is what further confirms the search time. Essentially, dating the searches to a nano-second of time. The middle school basketball webpage that is often alleged as the "true" search at 2:27, actually occurred a few nanoseconds after the search for "hos to die in the cold." It sounds like this method can't tell us exactly when the search was made but was used in conjunction with 5 other methods to confirm the search time. What this specific method can tell us though is when the tab was closed, which is where the 2:27am time stamp comes from - AKA the latest the search could have occurred.

This was impactful information to me since the prosecution's only argument has been that the search happend four hours LATER, on the instruction of KR. Speaking of which, McCabe's argument is that right when they found the body, KR screamed at her to google that. The body was discovered around 6am and the 911 call came in at 6:04am. Even if we entertain her version of the story, the searches still happen substantially later than she claims they did (6:23 and 6:24am)

 

[arielilane]

“Turtleboy” blogger Aidan Kearney’s criminal proceedings have become a First Amendment battleground as the Holden man faces witness intimidation charges tied to his controversial coverage of the murder case against Karen Read.

He appeared in Norfolk Superior Court on Wednesday seeking to overturn the bail conditions set during his district court arraignment earlier this month, which included orders to stay away from and have no contact with several witnesses in Read’s case.

Judge Peter B. Krupp did not issue a ruling and took the matter under advisement, noting that the lack of a specified distance in Kearney’s stay-away orders “seems to be an ambiguity that does limit what he can do.”

'Turtleboy' blogger wages First Amendment battle over witness intimidation charges

November 1, 2023

 

[Charlot123]

It is possible that the wounds on the arm could have been left before, or on the previous day? They look like deep nail scratches to me. With O'Keefe dying partially due to hypothermia, it may not be possible to date these wounds precisely (2 hours ante-mortum vs 6 hours, for example).

The rest of the story appears to be reconstructed through alcoholic haze. If Read was driving with BAL between 0.14 and 0.23, chances are, O'Keefe was even more drunk. And being able to drive with such BAL to me indicates habitual drinking. So whether it was KR who hit him, or he fell and was hit by someone else, or there was indeed an argument in the house, is very hard to discern because all of the participants might be telling stories of own partial blackouts. It must have been a very drunk night.

I tend to slightly side with a police version of it, given that the victim's nephew speaks about constant fighting in the house, but if the case is dropped, I won't be surprised.

 

[texaslb218]

DBM

 

[louvillian08]

It is possible that the wounds on the arm could have been left before, or on the previous day? They look like deep nail scratches to me. With O'Keefe dying partially due to hypothermia, it may not be possible to date these wounds precisely (2 hours ante-mortum vs 6 hours, for example).

The rest of the story appears to be reconstructed through alcoholic haze. If Read was driving with BAL between 0.14 and 0.23, chances are, O'Keefe was even more drunk. And being able to drive with such BAL to me indicates habitual drinking. So whether it was KR who hit him, or he fell and was hit by someone else, or there was indeed an argument in the house, is very hard to discern because all of the participants might be telling stories of own partial blackouts. It must have been a very drunk night.

I tend to slightly side with a police version of it, given that the victim's nephew speaks about constant fighting in the house, but if the case is dropped, I won't be surprised.

The google search is preventing me from believing the police version of events. In my non legal expert opinion, I never thought the google search (initially) was enough to exonerate KR or implicate JM. It's a late night, lots of drinking with a blizzard bearing down... I would have likely believed JM if the story was she googled it at 2am because the group of people at the house were arguing about whether it was safe to go outside. I can imagine people wanting to go make snow angels or men arguing who could stand outside the longest without a shirt. Dumb, drunk people things. The fact that the prosecution has only ever argued that it happened later that morning and uses it to go even further and attempt to implicate KR even more stands out to me. IMO, the expert testimony from the defense is more convincing and shows multiple ways to prove the google search did happen at 2:27am, not 6:24am like JM is claiming. Personally, I can not think of an innocent explanation as to why she would repeatedly lie about that.

 

[Charlot123]

The google search is preventing me from believing the police version of events. In my non legal expert opinion, I never thought the google search (initially) was enough to exonerate KR or implicate JM. It's a late night, lots of drinking with a blizzard bearing down... I would have likely believed JM if the story was she googled it at 2am because the group of people at the house were arguing about whether it was safe to go outside. I can imagine people wanting to go make snow angels or men arguing who could stand outside the longest without a shirt. Dumb, drunk people things. The fact that the prosecution has only ever argued that it happened later that morning and uses it to go even further and attempt to implicate KR even more stands out to me. IMO, the expert testimony from the defense is more convincing and shows multiple ways to prove the google search did happen at 2:27am, not 6:24am like JM is claiming. Personally, I can not think of an innocent explanation as to why she would repeatedly lie about that.

As a person who Googles everything, I can imagine Googling about freezing during a blizzard, and then Googling about does being drunk prolong the time it takes to die from hypothermia, etc, etc. During a heavy rain, I would Google "can one drown in a road pit?". I love QUORA. So - Googling doesn't make one guilty.

I think that O'Keefe's nephew and niece had no reason to lie. You can feel that they didn't quite like KR. In no way it makes her guilty, but the relationship was probably dying. JMO.

I do think that the Canton PD made many mistakes by being not transparent. I am not sure whether it was a cover up. It seems that Canton is a small town with a lot of nepotism, and the LEOs are mostly afraid of losing their jobs, because outside of Canton, they will be nonentities. This doesn't make them murderers yet.

As i said, I won't be surprised with any verdict, and I honestly believe that half of them have true memory lapses from alcohol. Which in itself is a scandal, and maybe they are trying to minimize the PR damage related to this fact.

I don't know...I used to live in Newton, and probably passed Canton many times, but I can't remember a thing about that town.

 

[waldojabba]

As a person who Googles everything, I can imagine Googling about freezing during a blizzard, and then Googling about does being drunk prolong the time it takes to die from hypothermia, etc, etc. During a heavy rain, I would Google "can one drown in a road pit?". I love QUORA. So - Googling doesn't make one guilty.

I think that O'Keefe's nephew and niece had no reason to lie. You can feel that they didn't quite like KR. In no way it makes her guilty, but the relationship was probably dying. JMO.

I do think that the Canton PD made many mistakes by being not transparent. I am not sure whether it was a cover up. It seems that Canton is a small town with a lot of nepotism, and the LEOs are mostly afraid of losing their jobs, because outside of Canton, they will be nonentities. This doesn't make them murderers yet.

As i said, I won't be surprised with any verdict, and I honestly believe that half of them have true memory lapses from alcohol. Which in itself is a scandal, and maybe they are trying to minimize the PR damage related to this fact.

I don't know...I used to live in Newton, and probably passed Canton many times, but I can't remember a thing about that town.

I am local to the area ( as the crow flies) and pretty much agree @Charlot123. I don’t believe you can prove without doubt either the explanation by prosecution or the defense.
It has been surprising to me that I have not seen a big story on this whole thing being one big alcohol fueled tragic event. Maybe the press feels that’s disrespectful at this time or maybe I am not local enough or followed closely enough to have seen the in town coverage.
It is beyond terrible this man lost his life for no reason. I just don’t think anyone knows with any degree of certainty what really
happened.
JMO.

 

[ch_13]

As a person who Googles everything, I can imagine Googling about freezing during a blizzard, and then Googling about does being drunk prolong the time it takes to die from hypothermia, etc, etc. During a heavy rain, I would Google "can one drown in a road pit?". I love QUORA. So - Googling doesn't make one guilty.

Snipped.

In some ways this theory makes a lot of sense. However, my biggest issue with it is that the SIL denied that she googled that term during the party. She says that she googled it the next morning at Karen's request. Why is she lying about it? And why did the prosecution expert backs her up on that and claims that the search at 2 AM never actually happened?

If it's true that the search was just an unfortunate coincidence and had nothing to do with John's death then the state has really painted themselves in a corner by trying to deny that.

 

[HarmonyE.]

In some ways this theory makes a lot of sense. However, my biggest issue with it is that the SIL denied that she googled that term during the party. She says that she googled it the next morning at Karen's request. Why is she lying about it? And why did the prosecution expert backs her up on that and claims that the search at 2 AM never actually happened?

If she only googled it after his body was found, it would have been after he was transported to the hospital, not as soon as they found him. It's certainly possible, I suppose, but at that point it would have been clear that he was very close to death if not technically already dead. And Karen could have asked the EMTs that question, rather than shout at someone else to google it.

But for me this case begins and ends with his injuries. There's no way such a vehicle caused that small, solo, deep head injury or the scratches/lacerations going up and down his arm, nor is there anything on the lawn that could have caused them. Aside from those injuries and the black eyes which may have been caused by the deep head injury, he had no other types of injuries you'd expect to see on someone who was hit so hard by a large SUV he was knocked (sideways, no less!) 12 feet onto the lawn.

The Commonwealth's theory borders on the nonsensical, and keep in mind this is a new theory. Up until a few weeks ago they'd claimed she made three point turn and hit him but when they realized that story was never going to fly they had to come up with a new one that matched her broken taillight.

If the snow plow driver is credible, he'll insist on the stand that there was no body in that spot at 2:30 am but that at 3:00 a car was parked on the street right in front of where his body would have been. It was not the same color as Karen Read's dark SUV. Someone dropping John's body off? Checking on him?

I don't care if the kids said they argued a lot. I believe them. But no one has described an abusive relationship, and lots of couples argue. The vast majority don't randomly decide to run down their partner after dropping them off at an acquaintance's house. Drunk or sober.

It's not Read's job to prove her innocence. The Commonwealth has to prove her guilt, and so far it looks like that will be a major uphill battle for them.

 

[arielilane]

I am on the fence with this case. It's a fascinating case, and as others' said unfortunately someone lost their life. I can't fathom how JO would get hit leaving the vehicle, did he slip, lose balance? Can't wait to see the evidence, and I really don't know why some evidence is being withheld from defense? Is that correct? Doesn't seem right, if true. If you're confident about your case, why no transparency? moo - still catching up on the case. speculation, as always.

 

[waldojabba]

Karen Reid case evidence being withheld from defense I am on the fence with this case. It's a fascinating case, and as others' said unfortunately someone lost their life. I can't fathom how JO would get hit leaving the vehicle, did he slip, lose balance? Can't wait to see the evidence, and I really don't know why some evidence is being withheld from defense? Is that correct? Doesn't seem right, if true. If you're confident about your case, why no transparency? moo - still catching up on the case. speculation, as alway

 

[waldojabba]

I have not seen anything lately about any evidence being withheld from defense. That would be a violation of discovery. Imo

 

[ch_13]

I have not seen anything lately about any evidence being withheld from defense. That would be a violation of discovery. Imo

This is from September. I believe afterwards there was a hearing and the judge mandated deadlines for turning over some of this evidence.

Karen Read defense team says state is withholding key evidence

Lawyers for Karen Read — the Massachusetts woman charged with second degree murder in the death of her police officer boyfriend in a case that has garnered national attention and controversy — are demanding access to evidence they say the Commonwealth has been holding back. Read is accused of...

www.nbcboston.com

 

[HarmonyE.]

I have not seen anything lately about any evidence being withheld from defense. That would be a violation of discovery. Imo

They have to share exculpatory evidence with the defense. But they don't have to turn everything over yet.

 

[Charlot123]

If she only googled it after his body was found, it would have been after he was transported to the hospital, not as soon as they found him. It's certainly possible, I suppose, but at that point it would have been clear that he was very close to death if not technically already dead. And Karen could have asked the EMTs that question, rather than shout at someone else to google it.

But for me this case begins and ends with his injuries. There's no way such a vehicle caused that small, solo, deep head injury or the scratches/lacerations going up and down his arm, nor is there anything on the lawn that could have caused them. Aside from those injuries and the black eyes which may have been caused by the deep head injury, he had no other types of injuries you'd expect to see on someone who was hit so hard by a large SUV he was knocked (sideways, no less!) 12 feet onto the lawn.

The Commonwealth's theory borders on the nonsensical, and keep in mind this is a new theory. Up until a few weeks ago they'd claimed she made three point turn and hit him but when they realized that story was never going to fly they had to come up with a new one that matched her broken taillight.

If the snow plow driver is credible, he'll insist on the stand that there was no body in that spot at 2:30 am but that at 3:00 a car was parked on the street right in front of where his body would have been. It was not the same color as Karen Read's dark SUV. Someone dropping John's body off? Checking on him?

I don't care if the kids said they argued a lot. I believe them. But no one has described an abusive relationship, and lots of couples argue. The vast majority don't randomly decide to run down their partner after dropping them off at an acquaintance's house. Drunk or sober.

It's not Read's job to prove her innocence. The Commonwealth has to prove her guilt, and so far it looks like that will be a major uphill battle for them.

Not to contradict, but having watched one (political) murder video, I came to the conclusion that one never knows the snow plow drivers’ role. Could the injuries come from a snow mower, in a blizzard, if a lying body is unnoticed?

 

[ch_13]

Not to contradict, but having watched one (political) murder video, I came to the conclusion that one never knows the snow plow drivers’ role. Could the injuries come from a snow mower, in a blizzard, if a lying body is unnoticed?

My understanding is that JO was not by the curb, he was up on the lawn, so the snowplow would have had to have hit him with a great deal of force.

JO's injuries are mostly to his head, plus the scratches on his arm. Nothing to his body.

I don't think that matches up to what would happen to a person that's pushed 10 or 15 feet by a snowplow. I would expect to see broken bones and lots of bruising to the body. Even if he was lying parallel to the curb, facing the plow head-first, I would think a steel plow would probably have at least snapped his neck.

 

[HarmonyE.]

b.

Not to contradict, but having watched one (political) murder video, I came to the conclusion that one never knows the snow plow drivers’ role. Could the injuries come from a snow mower, in a blizzard, if a lying body is unnoticed?

The first plow came along 2 hours after Karen Read dropped John O'Keefe off. I don't think JO would have hung around outside in 18 degree temps without a coat. If you are speculating that Read hit him and then two hours later a plow also hit him, as other poster notes there were very few injuries on his body and none seem to fit a pedestrian accident, never mind two.

 

[Charlot123]

My understanding is that JO was not by the curb, he was up on the lawn, so the snowplow would have had to have hit him with a great deal of force.

JO's injuries are mostly to his head, plus the scratches on his arm. Nothing to his body.

I don't think that matches up to what would happen to a person that's pushed 10 or 15 feet by a snowplow. I would expect to see broken bones and lots of bruising to the body. Even if he was lying parallel to the curb, facing the plow head-first, I would think a steel plow would probably have at least snapped his neck.

Thank you!

 

[Charlot123]

b.


The first plow came along 2 hours after Karen Read dropped John O'Keefe off. I don't think JO would have hung around outside in 18 degree temps without a coat. If you are speculating that Read hit him and then two hours later a plow also hit him, as other poster notes there were very few injuries on his body and none seem to fit a pedestrian accident, never mind two.

Thank you! I am not sure whether KR hit him; I am trying to understand what kind of impact would his traumas be consistent with. It surely is a very strange story.

 

[louvillian08]

Snipped.

In some ways this theory makes a lot of sense. However, my biggest issue with it is that the SIL denied that she googled that term during the party. She says that she googled it the next morning at Karen's request. Why is she lying about it? And why did the prosecution expert backs her up on that and claims that the search at 2 AM never actually happened?

If it's true that the search was just an unfortunate coincidence and had nothing to do with John's death then the state has really painted themselves in a corner by trying to deny that.

Yes, exactly. I thought my comment was clear but based on some of the replies, I suppose not! Thank you for wording it better than I could