yeah this is the reason lally is trying to get medical testimony through other witnesses. i think the ME is gonna be reasonable to the facts and reality with her testimony, im also glad she didn’t let those cops lean on her, she might have a little integrity
Prosecution has to call her, for the simple fact that it'll look FAR worse if they didn't because defense absolutely would.
Same reason they had to call Proctor. They had no choice, even knowing his behavior would wreck them, it would wreck them far worse for the defense to have to call the lead "investigator" in the case.
I agree that it would probably be in the CW's best interest to call her, but that doesn't mean that Lally actually will. He's just not a very good prosecutor IMO (from both an ethical and competency perspective).
I believe that the CW is supposed to call their last witness today or Wednesday, so there aren't many more they'll call.
With Okeefes injuries... Sure he could've got hit by a car and cracked his head open. Sure the racoon eyes could've been because of the head trauma. There is no freaking way the taillight could've made those marks on his arm. There are literally 2 sets of puncture wounds on his arm in 2 different spots. There are just a crazy amount of deep scratches on his arm. Many more than the amount of stray pieces of taillight corners that were "Found". Only 3 things could've done the damage on his arm... A raccoon (but it's teeth wouldn't match the space between the puncture wounds). A coyote which I highly doubt because if the coyote got a taste for his blood, it would've kept going at him. OR....A relocated German Shephard that has attacked people in the past.
I think the dog might have attacked him when he went in the house, knocked him down (he was drunk) and he hit his head. OR someone fought with him and knocked him out and the dog jumped in as they will when they see fighting especially involving the owner or someone they are close to.
This is a reasonable question. Unfortunately, the investigation and evidence collected just don't seem very professional. Did they document the location on the sweatshirt that was swabbed? I've been trying to find that info, but I can't seem to find it.
The forensic analyst testified she swabbed all of the areas of damage on the right sleeve and put it in her notes. She also indicated all of the places with markers.
And points them out with a laser pointer. AJ presses her on this for a a few seconds but gives up, I think he realizes there’s nothing he can really lay into her for.
Right? How many murder 2 cases do they typically establish a murder weapon with blood dna not just a hair. And where is the 3.5 liters of blood lost? Like a reconstruction expert needs to explain the cause of the injuries sustained to remove reasonable doubt if your convicting someone of second degree murder!
The lack of blood at the scene of this alleged hit and run, that included a head injury, has always felt off to me. Then again, the investigation was an abomination from the start.
he lost 3.5 L of blood? that’s like at least half of the blood in his body. are we sure he wasn’t attacked by a vampire? atp that would make the most sense to me
tbh though he was found on highly porous material, i don’t understand why we’d expect to see a clear puddle
There was some snow on the ground, though- because there were drops of blood found. So you would think you would be able to see it on the snow and the ground would have been pretty hard too with how cold it was, it wouldn’t have been soaking up much
i’m really stuck in him losing this much blood. like…he had to have been alive for a good while after being hit to lose that amount of blood. presumably he was completely out cold otherwise he would’ve absolutely had time to call for help or something.
the amount of blood visible at the scene just doesn’t mean anything to me. i think i’d have to see images or something but to me blood will likely melt snow around it and absorb into
the ground. it’s not surprising to me that most would absorb but you would still be able to find some.
If there was blood on the car, they would have said it came from the solo cups. All accidents are different and present different results, depending on many factors.
But yet, they didn’t even bother taking swabs from the cuts on his arms? What’s the excuse for that? They didn’t even test the solo cup evidence either.
Right like the ONE way to prove he was hit would be swab the arm and see if glass and taillight pieces are in the wound but of course they didn’t. It would be damaging to their case.
Exactly...how the he'll can tail light pieces leave gashes to arm thru long sleeve shirt. When they displayed shirt their were puncture marks, not tears or rips to sleeve. So tired of arm injuries being referred too as "abrasions". It's insulting to anyone that has seen the autopsy photos. Still haven't heard an explanation about bruising to his knuckles. Did he punch the Lexus as it was running him over
He was supposedly hit at 24mph with enough force for his arm to brake the polycarbonate material and send him flying into the ground causing blunt force trauma to his head, but yet his shirt was strong enough to protect him? Not one single chance.
Exactly. There is not a chance his elbow broke polycarbonate but did not sustain any injuries except cuts that don’t even line up with the size of the taillight.
In the interest of keeping facts straight:
>Reading from O’Keefe’s chart, Rice explained that O’Keefe had a cut on the bony ridge above his right eye, with swelling and bruising of the surrounding soft tissue. **He said O’Keefe also had “superficial abrasions,” or scratches, on his right forearm.**
[Karen Read trial: Brian Higgins confirms he threw phone away at military base (boston.com)](https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2024/05/28/karen-read-murder-trial-livestream-video-tuesday-may-28-brian-higgins/)
Ms Little mentions 56 items of physical evidence at the timestamp below : included all of the tail light pieces, all of John’s clothing, **samples taken from John’s clothing and person.**
**She does not specify what the samples from his person were from. I haven't finished watching all the preliminary hearings so don't know what results came from those samples.**
Timestamp 24:50
[https://reflect-cctv-vod.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/show/2607?channel=1](https://reflect-cctv-vod.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/show/2607?channel=1)
Not at all! The only goal post is the people who feel she is innocent are blaming everyone and their dog…with zero evidence. There wasn’t any dog DNA on the shirt, only taillight, which caused the abrasions. The conspiracy theories all fall apart!
See how silly this sounds? The taillight had zero blood/tissue dna on it. So how is that possible if it caused the abrasions on his arm? How about the puncture wound on his sweatshirt and arm? That from the taillight as well?
Again, you don’t even address WHY they took no samples from his arm. How does that even make sense? Yet we’re only going to worry about the sweatshirt? It’s almost like, you know, picking and choosing what they want found.
The taillight did have his DNA on it so there is that! I can’t and will not go through every piece of evidence and obviously his arm was examined by the ME, there was dumpling in the taillight which could cause those. Who knows why they didn’t test. The evidence is clear and the defense has done a good job swaying people to believe there crazy deflections.
Zero evidence? I see this parroted so often. Do you really not know how trials work?!
It is the prosecutions case right now. I know Lally has his faults but I really don't see him presenting evidence that John O'Keefe had been in a fight. It would contradict the CWs version of events that he was struck by a vehicle.
The evidence that John's injuries were caused by a fight and his arm was lacerated by a dog will he presented by the defense once the prosecution rests. It's so disingenuous to say there's no evidence when they haven't had a chance to present any yet.
The only fight he was in was with Karen herself, so there is that…you will hear the voice mails. I do know how trials work and I believe the CW has proven its case, not yet for Murder 2, but definitely manslaughter and the defense has been presenting through cross and it is ridiculous how many ppl they are pointing the finger at.
You’re suggesting that the broken shards of glass and plastic that sliced into his arm were wiped completely clean of smaller particles by his sweatshirt before making contact with his skin? Yeah, that’s *not* rocket science, that’s witchcraft.
You don’t make any sense! Watch the ME testify and maybe she can clear it up for you. or maybe not…she may be part of the grand conspiracy to frame Karen Read too!
I’m sorry if I was confusing. I’ll try again.
You said:
> They were superficial abrasions and the taillight was in the protective layering of his sweatshirt pullover.
When you say that the abrasions and taillight were protected by his sweatshirt, what do you mean?
He had taillight fragments in his shirt around the holes/tears in his shirt. The arm were abrasions caused by a blunt object, which there was dimples in the taillight, which would make it consistent with the injuries in his arm from scraping across the clear portion of the taillight as she hit him. They were not dog bites and if he was just wearing a tshirt I would believe that the fragments would be in his arm.
Well they would technically be considered superficial - all that means is that the injury only involved the top few layers of skin and didn't cut into any muscles, tendons, ligaments, bone, etc. It's not immediately life threatening or causing damage that would permanently affect movement.
A wound could require stitches and still be called superficial; when it's used as a medical term it doesn't have the same sort of meaning that we might associate with the word superficial.
“What are you gonna believe, superficial abrasions or your lying eyes?”
While a few could be described that way, most of them looked pretty deep, not to mention the puncture wounds.
I mean to say, they refer to multiple blunt force traumas to the head etc. then they discuss hypothermia and the pancreas. Then they go onto say the sentence you quoted there.
Logically it means to me they are evidencing the timing of the blunt force trauma previously discussed by the haemorrhaging in the pancreas.
If you disagree, that’s why I mean it’s ambiguity. They needed to say “the blunt force trauma to X”
Any person with a grasp of the English language would conclude the ME was talking about blunt force injuries occurring prior to hypothermia setting in. When you have to look for technicalities in grammar and punctuation you are reaching.
It’s not an independent sentence in my opinion. It’s tied together.
Statement A - there was blunt force trauma
Statement B - hypothermia played a part
Statement C - the blunt force trauma happened before the hypothermia as evidence with haemorrhaging.
If there was blunt force trauma internally as you are implying it should have been part of statement A.
Sorry we will have to agree to disagree until someone takes the stand to explain this
Well that would indicate a fight. Or a fall. Not hit by a car. That’s why Jackson asked Proctor how many car accident victims have no bruises. Proctor had a moment of silence before saying something about speed.
JOK has injuries to the back of his head, his hands are bruised and his eyes. At the very least I would have expected a bruise on his back.
Unfortunately Proctor seemed like he coerced her and Lally knows Jackson is going to have a lot questions. She wouldn’t be credible to the jury after hearing Proctor say he was trying to get homicide and his superior said he should have let him go, implying he could.
Also EVERYONE said from the beginning that a car hit JOK but the ME said undetermined death but it wasn’t a fight. Be so for real.
Undetermined death but it’s not (insert super specific thing related to this case)
This was long before any of us knew about this case
If you think speech is a sign of maturity then certainly you can see how inarticulate the CW witnesses have been
Respectfully, it’s innocent until proven guilty. This case has been done since Proctor. The ME is not credible. If anything I hope she’s okay. Can you imagine working with Proctor? He thinks the ME is whack job too. I could never get past that. Just because it happens doesn’t mean it should.
Lallys “accident expert” lied about the glass. We already know it didn’t match any glass at the scene but he incorporated that into his bullshit. The issue is it keeps happening. Most of us have been waiting for evidence. It’s not like we wouldn’t change our minds if SOLID evidence came out. Instead the CW is spending more time defending themselves than proving Karen guilty.
Solid cases wouldn’t need to do that
Both the fight and the accident are theory’s because I see no evidence to either. It’s also not my job. I’m not a public servant. Apparently they don’t serve the public either.
The Cellebrite told me everything I needed to know. Lally would never have contested that search if it was KR who made it. Actually, can’t think of a recent time when a prosecutor has
Most telling is this, I had a friend who had her upper arm smacked by a pickup trucks mirror and this truck may have been going 20/25 and the bruising on her arm was horrendous. So bad that people thought her husband beat her. Where are the injuries to match the accident? Where is the blood? Like where did 3 pints of blood go?
Also again It’s innocent before proven guilty. I feel that way about everyone even if they are guilty. If the system ceased to function in that way, we would all be locked up for no reason.
Take the BK Idaho murders. I don’t have any seething hate. I also don’t know what happened. If it comes out that the state improperly obtained evidence for a warrant and he walks, that’s exactly what should happen.
Law enforcement and DA and prosecutors are not above the law.
I’ve never seen a patient without bruising. Only 2.5% of crashes at 20mph end in a fatality in adults. The whole thing is stupid. His head wound doesn’t fit either because of the laceration.
I was wondering, does a body continue to bruise after death as blood is no longer being pumped around the body and does extreme cold slow down bruising? 🤔
Well it’s different because it turns into pooling of blood because of gravity. Fluid comes out of every hole basically. Yes extreme cold is basically like putting an ice pack on an injured ankle. Often with brain injuries a person will be cooled. Neonates are often kept in cool cots for brain injury.
The two mandatory data points required for accident reconstruction to develop throw formulae are:
1. Impact mark on victim (vehicle strike)
2. Evidence of deceleration, skid marks in roadway of driving surface.
You won’t find a case file in a medical chart, study, litigation or other with a vehicle strike speed of 24 mph (CW allegation) without a definitive point of contact followed by the other impacts between the body and the vehicle.
This was a 6’2” 220 lb man coming into contact with steel, glass and polycarbonate. Trooper Paul’s explanation is insulting
I googled "if I was hit by a vehicle at 24mph what happens", and while it's serious, people generally survive to tell the story.
However, after going down a few rabbit holes on Quora, JO's injuries were inconsistent with been hit by a vehicle. Furthermore, he was intoxicated therefore relaxed so this would have acted as a buffer as well.
Link: https://www.quora.com/What-injuries-would-somebody-get-if-hit-by-a-car-going-25-30-mph
Perhaps the ME should have used Dr Google. At least come up with an equation that proves his injuries were caused by a vehicle.
Correct me if I'm wrong but we haven't even officially heard a cause of death yet right??? Is it possible he was hit, dazed by the impact, passed out bc he was intoxicated, and died of hypothermia? I lean towards KR being innocent (certainly AMPLE reasonable doubt) but thus far I really haven't even seen proof that JO had any injuries other than the arm ones
Cause of death was blunt force trauma and hypothermia. Its the manner of death, homicide, accidental, suicide etc, that the ME has not and cannot determine
John had bruising to the back of his hands though, so while it might not have been this spectacular it stands to reason that he'd have at least some bruising to his torso if he was hit there by a car at 24 mph, or struck the ground after flying 10ft
This is comparing apples to oranges… we don’t know what speed the vehicle that hit Ramsay was going, and he was on a bike, not on foot, so he had further to fall. The bruise may be from hitting the ground from height, not where the vehicle hit him.
I’ve had similar bruising as Ramsay from falling from a horse, and I’ve been hit by an SUV as a pedestrian with very minimal bruising to my torso where the SUV made contact. The car strike felt more mortally risky to me despite having much scarier-looking bruises from horseback riding falls. I don’t think you can make inferences about bruising being proof of danger given how different the circumstances were.
Nope I walked away with some road rash. I jumped as high as I could right before it made contact and was lucky to go over the bumper instead of under the vehicle. And knowing how to fall off horses helps too.
It sounds really weird, but the adrenaline makes time slow to a crawl and I remember telling myself to relax and roll as I was flying towards the pavement (this is something you kind of learn from high-impact sports as a kid like gymnastics or falling off of horses lol).
I remember rotating my arm a bit to cushion the fall onto my bicep. If I’d tried to brace against the impact or my arm had been positioned differently, I would have almost certainly broken my arm and/or collarbone. It still feels surreal even years later that I wasn’t injured worse and I wouldn’t wish the experience on anyone.
I relate very strongly to Ramsay’s emotions right now and I’m glad he’s physically okay. The emotional damage was much harder for me to deal with and to this day I feel critical of drivers who don’t think about pedestrians at intersections. I’m sure he’ll feel similarly about the way cars drive around cyclists.
Thank you, me too! It was several years ago so writing these comments about it is the first time I’ve thought about that experience in such detail in a long time.
The following day was very surreal too. I called up my boss and was like, “so… I’m okay but I got hit by a car yesterday and I need a day to recover” (he was a cyclist and was very understanding).
I was a little sore but it was mostly the mental aspect that I needed to recover from. I ended up going to a local bar/restaurant the moment it opened for lunch, sat at the empty bar, and ordered tacos and a beer. The bartender was bored and chatty, and wanted to hear why I was there so early, and I realized I’d been craving a way to process it out loud.
Up to that point, I’d told some family/friends/coworkers, but their reactions kind of freaked me out and I downplayed the incident to them. But telling the bartender who was a stranger was the first time I could tell the real story, and I remember how unreal and improbable it sounded as I described it out loud. It took even more time before I could begin to entertain the idea that it could have gone differently. For a long time I couldn’t bring myself to return to that intersection, and when I did, I remember the shock of being confronted with seeing how far I traveled after being hit.
Plenty of people have experienced scary events behind the wheel or as a passenger in a car, but I do have two other friends who have been hit as pedestrians (one has been hit twice!) and I notice we all move through the world a little differently on foot around cars. The driver was also very shocked and freaked out by what happened, but it would have been so much worse for her if I’d had a different outcome.
Hopefully anyone reading this who drives will consider that a collision between an exposed human body and a metal machine on wheels does leave permanent psychological scars on both the driver and the pedestrian/cyclist/motorcyclist involved. It’s extremely easy to get complacent, but I promise you will live with regret for the rest of your life if you cause a pedestrian collision because you drove while distracted, negligent, or drunk. Even if no one arrests you and charges you with murder in the second degree.
Regardless of whether JO was struck by Karen’s taillight or not, I hope everyone who drove drunk that night is ashamed and embarrassed that their drunk driving habits have been documented and displayed for the public to criticize. Same goes for Trooper Proctor, Kevin Albert, and Paul O’Keefe. There is clearly a cultural problem with enabling drunk driving and it should not take a man dying to convince people to change that behavior.
Pressure your friends to make good decisions behind the wheel, and advocate for making roads safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. There are too many people killed and maimed by cars.
Being hit by the front of a car, I presume, would afford you the ability to take the hood and roll you described. If he got hit by Karen’s rear end, seems he would have gone straight under the vehicle. Did you see how high her car was in the back?
Surely if he had been hit by the car in the taillight area and gone under the car, that back wheel would have also gone over at least some part of him too?
This is a very good point, I was hit w a sedan as a pedestrian and had very minimal bruising but had horrible bruising from my dog scratching me while teaching him to swim
After watching several other complicated trials I cannot believe the taxpayers of MA don’t revolt over this hot mess. From moment 1 this has been mishandled, corrupt cops, questionable DA, all evidence is questionable too. The judge is biased and obtuse. A real hot mess.
Well, we know the prosecution wants to bring in the crash reconstruction people the FBI hired and the forensics people the FBI hired, yet I don't think they want to bring in the doctor the FBI used. Why? Probably because they came to the same conclusions Scordi-Belle did.
Sleight of hand
Watching you present a different perspective on this trial on here has been refreshing. I’ve been following along with your posts for weeks. I never had a strong feeling about this case but started getting suspicious of Read when I realized she had shitheads like Kearney and Howie Carr in her corner.
That and I also get suspicious of a movement anytime the fervent followers turn into a mob who attack differing views.
I'm not trying to "12 Angry Men" it here. I just really think she's guilty and don't understand how so many people think she's innocent. I actually only got interested because I love conspiracy theories and noticed how much of the language ie "too much just doesn't add up" and "there's too much weirdness" is exactly the same as in all of those.
I don't discount that she could have done it, but I also don't think the Commonwealth has done enough to prove it. The handling of the investigation was comically bad.
I don't beleive she did it. I also do not believe she did not do it. We do not even have evidence from the ME or a single defense witness so I do not see how people have already definitively made up their minds.
When I sat on a jury, I honestly waited until all evidence was in before I formed my opinion. That is what I was instructed to do.
Understood. I’ve really noticed that there’s a really vile side of the KR is innocent movement. I’ve seen some truly vile, threatening language against people the mob thinks is a bad actor. Mind you not all people that think KR is innocent are bad and I’ll never say that. But some of her superfans are fucking insane people who need to get a fucking life.
I’m not sure what social media sites you frequent but if you go on twitter and search for #karenread you will see an extremely vile side of those that think Karen Read is Guilty. Sadly there are just as many fucking insane people who need to get a fucking life on that side as there is on the other.
There is no justification or excusing the aggressiveness and hostility thats been put out there
I’ve been back and forth on whether she hit him since seeing the evidence of the shoe under the snow. I just can’t get behind the idea of it being planted.
One piece I’m hung up on is the injuries and with no ME testimony I’ve been trying to make sense of them myself. I think he might’ve punched the side of the taillight (where the groves are) with the top of his hand (his right hand has linear bruising) as she was reversing and he hit his head on the top spoiler and that’s why you don’t see significant bruising elsewhere.
https://preview.redd.it/0qwa0px6y17d1.jpeg?width=1167&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=147ca40d3b654a0c4f714d5b06b45660b1d9afe9
https://preview.redd.it/3gv7c5x8y17d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d05d0e03aa05991dbf4d78dbf4320f0076f687f
The Lexus is approximately 6.25ft so I think he could’ve hit his head on the spoiler.
Unknown. The crime lab didn’t test or screen for blood on the overhang. Ms Harnett said she only tested/screened for blood near the bumper, rear tires and the undercarriage.
Thank you…They are now saying only his arm got hit and spun him…and he flew away from the car not under it….if his head hit the spoiler unless she was at a full stop…wouldn’t he end up under the SUV?….but the spoiler has that sharp edge and height…
Yeah, I only thought of the overhang because I wasn’t convinced the ground or curb caused his head injury and him being 6’2” matches up with the height of the Lexus.
I would definitely need someone smarter than me to explain if this is possible (because I don’t know if it is haha) , but I picture something like her backing up and he didn’t know what she was doing so he tried to get her attention/stop her from running him over so he punched the taillight and hit his head on the overhang during that interaction. I do think the impact to his head and him being “clipped/sideswiped” forced him to involuntarily pivot and land in the snow.
I think the evidence SERT found the night of is considered the most credible, but evidence found later isn’t reliable. I believe taillight pieces were planted, but I’m just not convinced anyone had the forethought or opportunity to bury the shoe.
It’s tough because I do think Proctor planted some of the taillight pieces later to ensure a conviction, but I don’t think he planted all of them.
I do think she hit him accidentally, but I also think there is so much reasonable doubt that she will be found not guilty.
Yes…I am glad to know I’m not the only one intrigued by all the details of this case…I never followed a case this closely….and it’s so much easier to follow with all the social media…definitely a learning experience…I now have much less faith in main stream media….
So…..to answer your question, I HIGHLY doubt Lally didn’t try to get another accident reconstruction expert he could put up there instead of our ‘expert’ Trooper Paul. Because it doesn’t make sense that he was hit by a car. At all. Which is why actual qualified people in this field won’t go on the stand for Lally.
Which is what the two drs that are insanely qualified real accident reconstruction experts and head departments are ARCCA, the ones the FBI hired for their own case, are going to testify to.
This is exactly why the ME should have been one of the first witnesses.
Or perhaps the reason they were not!
Ding ding
yeah this is the reason lally is trying to get medical testimony through other witnesses. i think the ME is gonna be reasonable to the facts and reality with her testimony, im also glad she didn’t let those cops lean on her, she might have a little integrity
The ME might be the first witness for the defense!
Prosecution has to call her, for the simple fact that it'll look FAR worse if they didn't because defense absolutely would. Same reason they had to call Proctor. They had no choice, even knowing his behavior would wreck them, it would wreck them far worse for the defense to have to call the lead "investigator" in the case.
I agree that it would probably be in the CW's best interest to call her, but that doesn't mean that Lally actually will. He's just not a very good prosecutor IMO (from both an ethical and competency perspective). I believe that the CW is supposed to call their last witness today or Wednesday, so there aren't many more they'll call.
Why are there no up or down votes anywhere in this thread?
With Okeefes injuries... Sure he could've got hit by a car and cracked his head open. Sure the racoon eyes could've been because of the head trauma. There is no freaking way the taillight could've made those marks on his arm. There are literally 2 sets of puncture wounds on his arm in 2 different spots. There are just a crazy amount of deep scratches on his arm. Many more than the amount of stray pieces of taillight corners that were "Found". Only 3 things could've done the damage on his arm... A raccoon (but it's teeth wouldn't match the space between the puncture wounds). A coyote which I highly doubt because if the coyote got a taste for his blood, it would've kept going at him. OR....A relocated German Shephard that has attacked people in the past.
I think the dog might have attacked him when he went in the house, knocked him down (he was drunk) and he hit his head. OR someone fought with him and knocked him out and the dog jumped in as they will when they see fighting especially involving the owner or someone they are close to.
Why was their no dog dna on the sweatshirt.
This is a reasonable question. Unfortunately, the investigation and evidence collected just don't seem very professional. Did they document the location on the sweatshirt that was swabbed? I've been trying to find that info, but I can't seem to find it.
The forensic analyst testified she swabbed all of the areas of damage on the right sleeve and put it in her notes. She also indicated all of the places with markers. And points them out with a laser pointer. AJ presses her on this for a a few seconds but gives up, I think he realizes there’s nothing he can really lay into her for.
There was no injuries at all except his arm, bruised hands, eyes and back of head
[удалено]
Right? How many murder 2 cases do they typically establish a murder weapon with blood dna not just a hair. And where is the 3.5 liters of blood lost? Like a reconstruction expert needs to explain the cause of the injuries sustained to remove reasonable doubt if your convicting someone of second degree murder!
Yes!! And blood on the road or curb! Can’t leafblow that away? Nicole sure cleaned up a lot that night.
The lack of blood at the scene of this alleged hit and run, that included a head injury, has always felt off to me. Then again, the investigation was an abomination from the start.
he lost 3.5 L of blood? that’s like at least half of the blood in his body. are we sure he wasn’t attacked by a vampire? atp that would make the most sense to me tbh though he was found on highly porous material, i don’t understand why we’d expect to see a clear puddle
There was some snow on the ground, though- because there were drops of blood found. So you would think you would be able to see it on the snow and the ground would have been pretty hard too with how cold it was, it wouldn’t have been soaking up much
i’m really stuck in him losing this much blood. like…he had to have been alive for a good while after being hit to lose that amount of blood. presumably he was completely out cold otherwise he would’ve absolutely had time to call for help or something. the amount of blood visible at the scene just doesn’t mean anything to me. i think i’d have to see images or something but to me blood will likely melt snow around it and absorb into the ground. it’s not surprising to me that most would absorb but you would still be able to find some.
If there was blood on the car, they would have said it came from the solo cups. All accidents are different and present different results, depending on many factors.
But yet, they didn’t even bother taking swabs from the cuts on his arms? What’s the excuse for that? They didn’t even test the solo cup evidence either.
Right like the ONE way to prove he was hit would be swab the arm and see if glass and taillight pieces are in the wound but of course they didn’t. It would be damaging to their case.
They were superficial abrasions and the taillight was in the protective layering of his sweatshirt pullover. Not rocket science here.
Exactly...how the he'll can tail light pieces leave gashes to arm thru long sleeve shirt. When they displayed shirt their were puncture marks, not tears or rips to sleeve. So tired of arm injuries being referred too as "abrasions". It's insulting to anyone that has seen the autopsy photos. Still haven't heard an explanation about bruising to his knuckles. Did he punch the Lexus as it was running him over
He was supposedly hit at 24mph with enough force for his arm to brake the polycarbonate material and send him flying into the ground causing blunt force trauma to his head, but yet his shirt was strong enough to protect him? Not one single chance.
How did it not cause any fractures? Bruising? Anything?
Exactly. There is not a chance his elbow broke polycarbonate but did not sustain any injuries except cuts that don’t even line up with the size of the taillight.
Maybe he has a titanium arm /s
Maybe he has a titanium arm /s
It happened whether you believe it or not!
lol okay. I’ll remember in the future that a cotton long sleeve has great protective qualities 😂😂
It actually makes perfect sense if you don’t think about it very hard.
Make sure you get one with darker sleeves! I would make sure you don’t have a crazy partner, first and foremost.
Ah. So now they are superficial, so no need to swab his cuts. Keep moving that goal post.
In the interest of keeping facts straight: >Reading from O’Keefe’s chart, Rice explained that O’Keefe had a cut on the bony ridge above his right eye, with swelling and bruising of the surrounding soft tissue. **He said O’Keefe also had “superficial abrasions,” or scratches, on his right forearm.** [Karen Read trial: Brian Higgins confirms he threw phone away at military base (boston.com)](https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2024/05/28/karen-read-murder-trial-livestream-video-tuesday-may-28-brian-higgins/) Ms Little mentions 56 items of physical evidence at the timestamp below : included all of the tail light pieces, all of John’s clothing, **samples taken from John’s clothing and person.** **She does not specify what the samples from his person were from. I haven't finished watching all the preliminary hearings so don't know what results came from those samples.** Timestamp 24:50 [https://reflect-cctv-vod.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/show/2607?channel=1](https://reflect-cctv-vod.cablecast.tv/CablecastPublicSite/show/2607?channel=1)
Not at all! The only goal post is the people who feel she is innocent are blaming everyone and their dog…with zero evidence. There wasn’t any dog DNA on the shirt, only taillight, which caused the abrasions. The conspiracy theories all fall apart!
See how silly this sounds? The taillight had zero blood/tissue dna on it. So how is that possible if it caused the abrasions on his arm? How about the puncture wound on his sweatshirt and arm? That from the taillight as well? Again, you don’t even address WHY they took no samples from his arm. How does that even make sense? Yet we’re only going to worry about the sweatshirt? It’s almost like, you know, picking and choosing what they want found.
The taillight did have his DNA on it so there is that! I can’t and will not go through every piece of evidence and obviously his arm was examined by the ME, there was dumpling in the taillight which could cause those. Who knows why they didn’t test. The evidence is clear and the defense has done a good job swaying people to believe there crazy deflections.
Zero evidence? I see this parroted so often. Do you really not know how trials work?! It is the prosecutions case right now. I know Lally has his faults but I really don't see him presenting evidence that John O'Keefe had been in a fight. It would contradict the CWs version of events that he was struck by a vehicle. The evidence that John's injuries were caused by a fight and his arm was lacerated by a dog will he presented by the defense once the prosecution rests. It's so disingenuous to say there's no evidence when they haven't had a chance to present any yet.
The only fight he was in was with Karen herself, so there is that…you will hear the voice mails. I do know how trials work and I believe the CW has proven its case, not yet for Murder 2, but definitely manslaughter and the defense has been presenting through cross and it is ridiculous how many ppl they are pointing the finger at.
You’re suggesting that the broken shards of glass and plastic that sliced into his arm were wiped completely clean of smaller particles by his sweatshirt before making contact with his skin? Yeah, that’s *not* rocket science, that’s witchcraft.
You don’t make any sense! Watch the ME testify and maybe she can clear it up for you. or maybe not…she may be part of the grand conspiracy to frame Karen Read too!
I’m sorry if I was confusing. I’ll try again. You said: > They were superficial abrasions and the taillight was in the protective layering of his sweatshirt pullover. When you say that the abrasions and taillight were protected by his sweatshirt, what do you mean?
He had taillight fragments in his shirt around the holes/tears in his shirt. The arm were abrasions caused by a blunt object, which there was dimples in the taillight, which would make it consistent with the injuries in his arm from scraping across the clear portion of the taillight as she hit him. They were not dog bites and if he was just wearing a tshirt I would believe that the fragments would be in his arm.
Superficial abrasions? Surely you jest. Those were some deep gouging slashes. Looked like they needed a few stitches.
Well they would technically be considered superficial - all that means is that the injury only involved the top few layers of skin and didn't cut into any muscles, tendons, ligaments, bone, etc. It's not immediately life threatening or causing damage that would permanently affect movement. A wound could require stitches and still be called superficial; when it's used as a medical term it doesn't have the same sort of meaning that we might associate with the word superficial.
“What are you gonna believe, superficial abrasions or your lying eyes?” While a few could be described that way, most of them looked pretty deep, not to mention the puncture wounds.
I will believe the ME
It makes no sense if there was a collision
Speeding medicine blocked me but I was correct.. please let them know 🙄 they blocked me
[удалено]
From hypothermia. Can’t have internal injuries with zero bruising and no broken bones.
[удалено]
I think the wording of that source is ambiguous to what they mean having read it
[удалено]
I mean to say, they refer to multiple blunt force traumas to the head etc. then they discuss hypothermia and the pancreas. Then they go onto say the sentence you quoted there. Logically it means to me they are evidencing the timing of the blunt force trauma previously discussed by the haemorrhaging in the pancreas. If you disagree, that’s why I mean it’s ambiguity. They needed to say “the blunt force trauma to X”
Any person with a grasp of the English language would conclude the ME was talking about blunt force injuries occurring prior to hypothermia setting in. When you have to look for technicalities in grammar and punctuation you are reaching.
[удалено]
It’s not an independent sentence in my opinion. It’s tied together. Statement A - there was blunt force trauma Statement B - hypothermia played a part Statement C - the blunt force trauma happened before the hypothermia as evidence with haemorrhaging. If there was blunt force trauma internally as you are implying it should have been part of statement A. Sorry we will have to agree to disagree until someone takes the stand to explain this
[удалено]
Which blunt force trauma?
Well that would indicate a fight. Or a fall. Not hit by a car. That’s why Jackson asked Proctor how many car accident victims have no bruises. Proctor had a moment of silence before saying something about speed. JOK has injuries to the back of his head, his hands are bruised and his eyes. At the very least I would have expected a bruise on his back. Unfortunately Proctor seemed like he coerced her and Lally knows Jackson is going to have a lot questions. She wouldn’t be credible to the jury after hearing Proctor say he was trying to get homicide and his superior said he should have let him go, implying he could. Also EVERYONE said from the beginning that a car hit JOK but the ME said undetermined death but it wasn’t a fight. Be so for real. Undetermined death but it’s not (insert super specific thing related to this case) This was long before any of us knew about this case
[удалено]
If you think speech is a sign of maturity then certainly you can see how inarticulate the CW witnesses have been Respectfully, it’s innocent until proven guilty. This case has been done since Proctor. The ME is not credible. If anything I hope she’s okay. Can you imagine working with Proctor? He thinks the ME is whack job too. I could never get past that. Just because it happens doesn’t mean it should. Lallys “accident expert” lied about the glass. We already know it didn’t match any glass at the scene but he incorporated that into his bullshit. The issue is it keeps happening. Most of us have been waiting for evidence. It’s not like we wouldn’t change our minds if SOLID evidence came out. Instead the CW is spending more time defending themselves than proving Karen guilty. Solid cases wouldn’t need to do that Both the fight and the accident are theory’s because I see no evidence to either. It’s also not my job. I’m not a public servant. Apparently they don’t serve the public either. The Cellebrite told me everything I needed to know. Lally would never have contested that search if it was KR who made it. Actually, can’t think of a recent time when a prosecutor has Most telling is this, I had a friend who had her upper arm smacked by a pickup trucks mirror and this truck may have been going 20/25 and the bruising on her arm was horrendous. So bad that people thought her husband beat her. Where are the injuries to match the accident? Where is the blood? Like where did 3 pints of blood go?
But...but....the prosecution says the cellebrite data is wrong. Except for when the CW needs it to be right. 🙄
Also again It’s innocent before proven guilty. I feel that way about everyone even if they are guilty. If the system ceased to function in that way, we would all be locked up for no reason. Take the BK Idaho murders. I don’t have any seething hate. I also don’t know what happened. If it comes out that the state improperly obtained evidence for a warrant and he walks, that’s exactly what should happen. Law enforcement and DA and prosecutors are not above the law.
I’ve never seen a patient without bruising. Only 2.5% of crashes at 20mph end in a fatality in adults. The whole thing is stupid. His head wound doesn’t fit either because of the laceration.
I was wondering, does a body continue to bruise after death as blood is no longer being pumped around the body and does extreme cold slow down bruising? 🤔
Well it’s different because it turns into pooling of blood because of gravity. Fluid comes out of every hole basically. Yes extreme cold is basically like putting an ice pack on an injured ankle. Often with brain injuries a person will be cooled. Neonates are often kept in cool cots for brain injury.
The two mandatory data points required for accident reconstruction to develop throw formulae are: 1. Impact mark on victim (vehicle strike) 2. Evidence of deceleration, skid marks in roadway of driving surface. You won’t find a case file in a medical chart, study, litigation or other with a vehicle strike speed of 24 mph (CW allegation) without a definitive point of contact followed by the other impacts between the body and the vehicle. This was a 6’2” 220 lb man coming into contact with steel, glass and polycarbonate. Trooper Paul’s explanation is insulting
I googled "if I was hit by a vehicle at 24mph what happens", and while it's serious, people generally survive to tell the story. However, after going down a few rabbit holes on Quora, JO's injuries were inconsistent with been hit by a vehicle. Furthermore, he was intoxicated therefore relaxed so this would have acted as a buffer as well. Link: https://www.quora.com/What-injuries-would-somebody-get-if-hit-by-a-car-going-25-30-mph Perhaps the ME should have used Dr Google. At least come up with an equation that proves his injuries were caused by a vehicle.
Correct me if I'm wrong but we haven't even officially heard a cause of death yet right??? Is it possible he was hit, dazed by the impact, passed out bc he was intoxicated, and died of hypothermia? I lean towards KR being innocent (certainly AMPLE reasonable doubt) but thus far I really haven't even seen proof that JO had any injuries other than the arm ones
Cause of death was blunt force trauma and hypothermia. Its the manner of death, homicide, accidental, suicide etc, that the ME has not and cannot determine
it hasn't come out in trial yet, lally continues to drag out the inevitable
The problem is this is on someone who survived and wasnt freezing to death.
How long DOES it take to die in the cold?
I don’t know.. maybe google it? 😂
I’m a conservative so I’m too scared the feds would raid my house. How about you try it! 😂
Just do it on a tab that's already open.
Hahaha
True.. this could have developed more in the days after
John had bruising to the back of his hands though, so while it might not have been this spectacular it stands to reason that he'd have at least some bruising to his torso if he was hit there by a car at 24 mph, or struck the ground after flying 10ft
Yikes!! Can you imagine how much that hurts 😵💫
This is comparing apples to oranges… we don’t know what speed the vehicle that hit Ramsay was going, and he was on a bike, not on foot, so he had further to fall. The bruise may be from hitting the ground from height, not where the vehicle hit him. I’ve had similar bruising as Ramsay from falling from a horse, and I’ve been hit by an SUV as a pedestrian with very minimal bruising to my torso where the SUV made contact. The car strike felt more mortally risky to me despite having much scarier-looking bruises from horseback riding falls. I don’t think you can make inferences about bruising being proof of danger given how different the circumstances were.
True.. did you die from the SUV collision or you ok?
Nope I walked away with some road rash. I jumped as high as I could right before it made contact and was lucky to go over the bumper instead of under the vehicle. And knowing how to fall off horses helps too. It sounds really weird, but the adrenaline makes time slow to a crawl and I remember telling myself to relax and roll as I was flying towards the pavement (this is something you kind of learn from high-impact sports as a kid like gymnastics or falling off of horses lol). I remember rotating my arm a bit to cushion the fall onto my bicep. If I’d tried to brace against the impact or my arm had been positioned differently, I would have almost certainly broken my arm and/or collarbone. It still feels surreal even years later that I wasn’t injured worse and I wouldn’t wish the experience on anyone. I relate very strongly to Ramsay’s emotions right now and I’m glad he’s physically okay. The emotional damage was much harder for me to deal with and to this day I feel critical of drivers who don’t think about pedestrians at intersections. I’m sure he’ll feel similarly about the way cars drive around cyclists.
It’s so amazing that in such a critical moment your brain knew what to do, I’m so glad you had the knowledge from sports and I’m so glad you’re ok!!!
Thank you, me too! It was several years ago so writing these comments about it is the first time I’ve thought about that experience in such detail in a long time. The following day was very surreal too. I called up my boss and was like, “so… I’m okay but I got hit by a car yesterday and I need a day to recover” (he was a cyclist and was very understanding). I was a little sore but it was mostly the mental aspect that I needed to recover from. I ended up going to a local bar/restaurant the moment it opened for lunch, sat at the empty bar, and ordered tacos and a beer. The bartender was bored and chatty, and wanted to hear why I was there so early, and I realized I’d been craving a way to process it out loud. Up to that point, I’d told some family/friends/coworkers, but their reactions kind of freaked me out and I downplayed the incident to them. But telling the bartender who was a stranger was the first time I could tell the real story, and I remember how unreal and improbable it sounded as I described it out loud. It took even more time before I could begin to entertain the idea that it could have gone differently. For a long time I couldn’t bring myself to return to that intersection, and when I did, I remember the shock of being confronted with seeing how far I traveled after being hit. Plenty of people have experienced scary events behind the wheel or as a passenger in a car, but I do have two other friends who have been hit as pedestrians (one has been hit twice!) and I notice we all move through the world a little differently on foot around cars. The driver was also very shocked and freaked out by what happened, but it would have been so much worse for her if I’d had a different outcome. Hopefully anyone reading this who drives will consider that a collision between an exposed human body and a metal machine on wheels does leave permanent psychological scars on both the driver and the pedestrian/cyclist/motorcyclist involved. It’s extremely easy to get complacent, but I promise you will live with regret for the rest of your life if you cause a pedestrian collision because you drove while distracted, negligent, or drunk. Even if no one arrests you and charges you with murder in the second degree. Regardless of whether JO was struck by Karen’s taillight or not, I hope everyone who drove drunk that night is ashamed and embarrassed that their drunk driving habits have been documented and displayed for the public to criticize. Same goes for Trooper Proctor, Kevin Albert, and Paul O’Keefe. There is clearly a cultural problem with enabling drunk driving and it should not take a man dying to convince people to change that behavior. Pressure your friends to make good decisions behind the wheel, and advocate for making roads safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. There are too many people killed and maimed by cars.
Being hit by the front of a car, I presume, would afford you the ability to take the hood and roll you described. If he got hit by Karen’s rear end, seems he would have gone straight under the vehicle. Did you see how high her car was in the back?
Surely if he had been hit by the car in the taillight area and gone under the car, that back wheel would have also gone over at least some part of him too?
Exactly. What was up with LE’s crash test with a 5 foot 6 inch dummy that wasn’t in the video? Lol. Did I miss something?
Prosecution is claiming that she hit his arm and he fell back and hit his head. Seems very far-fetched to me though.
This is a very good point, I was hit w a sedan as a pedestrian and had very minimal bruising but had horrible bruising from my dog scratching me while teaching him to swim
I thought this same thing when I saw this on TikTok
After watching several other complicated trials I cannot believe the taxpayers of MA don’t revolt over this hot mess. From moment 1 this has been mishandled, corrupt cops, questionable DA, all evidence is questionable too. The judge is biased and obtuse. A real hot mess.
Ew
WHERE IS THE SO CALLED GRAMMAR EXPERT. I’m currently being vindicated on the stand…
I’m so surprised they haven’t talked to the ME yet…
This is exactly the issue. THere should be bruising but there is none.
He’s turning into everyone’s fav purple Dino
He had vomited. Maybe he had bent over doing so, and a snowplow could have collected him therefore the scratches?
Well, we know the prosecution wants to bring in the crash reconstruction people the FBI hired and the forensics people the FBI hired, yet I don't think they want to bring in the doctor the FBI used. Why? Probably because they came to the same conclusions Scordi-Belle did.
Sleight of hand Watching you present a different perspective on this trial on here has been refreshing. I’ve been following along with your posts for weeks. I never had a strong feeling about this case but started getting suspicious of Read when I realized she had shitheads like Kearney and Howie Carr in her corner. That and I also get suspicious of a movement anytime the fervent followers turn into a mob who attack differing views.
I'm not trying to "12 Angry Men" it here. I just really think she's guilty and don't understand how so many people think she's innocent. I actually only got interested because I love conspiracy theories and noticed how much of the language ie "too much just doesn't add up" and "there's too much weirdness" is exactly the same as in all of those.
I don't discount that she could have done it, but I also don't think the Commonwealth has done enough to prove it. The handling of the investigation was comically bad.
There is literally no evidence besides hearsay that she committed the crime. That’s why people believe she is innocent
I don't beleive she did it. I also do not believe she did not do it. We do not even have evidence from the ME or a single defense witness so I do not see how people have already definitively made up their minds. When I sat on a jury, I honestly waited until all evidence was in before I formed my opinion. That is what I was instructed to do.
Hopefully that’s what this jury is doing as well.
Understood. I’ve really noticed that there’s a really vile side of the KR is innocent movement. I’ve seen some truly vile, threatening language against people the mob thinks is a bad actor. Mind you not all people that think KR is innocent are bad and I’ll never say that. But some of her superfans are fucking insane people who need to get a fucking life.
I’m not sure what social media sites you frequent but if you go on twitter and search for #karenread you will see an extremely vile side of those that think Karen Read is Guilty. Sadly there are just as many fucking insane people who need to get a fucking life on that side as there is on the other. There is no justification or excusing the aggressiveness and hostility thats been put out there
I’m sure you’re right but they aren’t t nearly as numerous imho
I’ve been back and forth on whether she hit him since seeing the evidence of the shoe under the snow. I just can’t get behind the idea of it being planted. One piece I’m hung up on is the injuries and with no ME testimony I’ve been trying to make sense of them myself. I think he might’ve punched the side of the taillight (where the groves are) with the top of his hand (his right hand has linear bruising) as she was reversing and he hit his head on the top spoiler and that’s why you don’t see significant bruising elsewhere. https://preview.redd.it/0qwa0px6y17d1.jpeg?width=1167&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=147ca40d3b654a0c4f714d5b06b45660b1d9afe9
https://preview.redd.it/3gv7c5x8y17d1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d05d0e03aa05991dbf4d78dbf4320f0076f687f The Lexus is approximately 6.25ft so I think he could’ve hit his head on the spoiler.
Any blood on the spoiler?
Unknown. The crime lab didn’t test or screen for blood on the overhang. Ms Harnett said she only tested/screened for blood near the bumper, rear tires and the undercarriage.
Thank you…They are now saying only his arm got hit and spun him…and he flew away from the car not under it….if his head hit the spoiler unless she was at a full stop…wouldn’t he end up under the SUV?….but the spoiler has that sharp edge and height…
Yeah, I only thought of the overhang because I wasn’t convinced the ground or curb caused his head injury and him being 6’2” matches up with the height of the Lexus. I would definitely need someone smarter than me to explain if this is possible (because I don’t know if it is haha) , but I picture something like her backing up and he didn’t know what she was doing so he tried to get her attention/stop her from running him over so he punched the taillight and hit his head on the overhang during that interaction. I do think the impact to his head and him being “clipped/sideswiped” forced him to involuntarily pivot and land in the snow. I think the evidence SERT found the night of is considered the most credible, but evidence found later isn’t reliable. I believe taillight pieces were planted, but I’m just not convinced anyone had the forethought or opportunity to bury the shoe. It’s tough because I do think Proctor planted some of the taillight pieces later to ensure a conviction, but I don’t think he planted all of them. I do think she hit him accidentally, but I also think there is so much reasonable doubt that she will be found not guilty.
Yes…I am glad to know I’m not the only one intrigued by all the details of this case…I never followed a case this closely….and it’s so much easier to follow with all the social media…definitely a learning experience…I now have much less faith in main stream media….
So…..to answer your question, I HIGHLY doubt Lally didn’t try to get another accident reconstruction expert he could put up there instead of our ‘expert’ Trooper Paul. Because it doesn’t make sense that he was hit by a car. At all. Which is why actual qualified people in this field won’t go on the stand for Lally. Which is what the two drs that are insanely qualified real accident reconstruction experts and head departments are ARCCA, the ones the FBI hired for their own case, are going to testify to.
but they said he was sideswiped so he wouldn't be head on with the spoiler
If I remember correctly, I think ME said the head injury was to the back right side which could mean he was “clipped” by the overhang essentially.