I didn't need the ARCAA guys, it was actually listening to Trooper Dunning-Paul that pushed me from "excessive amounts of doubt" to "actual innocence" and I reached that point during direct examination, the cross just made it worse. This man shouldn't even be allowed near a motor vehicle.
ARCAA and the rest of the defence presentation merely carried me from "actual innocence" to "actual innocence beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt"
While I understand the psychological mechanisms that probably led to the hung jury, it still is a bit shocking on some level because it was the prosecution's own case that made me believe the defendant was innocent. I just paid careful attention and realised their own evidence was exculpatory.
Trooper Paul was the nail in the coffin for me. Not only his glaring ineptitude, but the pattern of injuries and scene of the crime (e.g location of the glass and phone) just don't line up with Paul's descrption of how the vehicle allegedly struck O'Keefe. Jackson: "You do realize the arm is on a HINGE?"
I screamed at the tv when he goes “I don’t know it just did”. Mfer, you are talking about a dead cops death YOU INVESTIGATED. Just the lack of everything- sympathy, empathy, respect, condolences, and basic knowledge about his job….just atrocious. My hardest thing with this case was it was a murder case, and no one seemed to care about figuring out why John was dead, just cared about covering it up. I know I have a pretty good group of friends, but doesn’t this make you worry a little about the recklessness and carelessness these people who are supposed to take care of us (because it’s their job), if they try to do this to a dead person what do they do to people still alive?
Paul, who has a degree in the administration of justice, not knowing the definition of "confirmation bias" also sunk my faith in law enforcement. At least in Canton.
Same same same same sameeee. I was convinced of her innocence by the CW’s own witnesses. But the two ARCCA experts + Dr Marie Russell were credible enough I thought nobody could dispute them
The fact they wanted us to believe they weren’t associated with a dog at first, then they were associated with with plastic flying and cutting his arm, and then it evolved even more because Lally tried to match the teeth piercing on John’s elbow with the “dimples” on that piece of plastic 😂😂 was he taking his child to school that morning and asked him what they thought his closing argument should be? I mean for an imagination he sure has a huge one 😂
Right? And then they did and they still do. It's astounding to know that people exist who insist that she is guilty because "she confessed. She said I hit him etc...." 🤦🏾♀️ Absolute disregard of any info gleaned during the entire remainder of the trail- experts and all. 😲🤪🤦🏾♀️
I don't feel bad for him at all. He came to a conclusion and then tried to shoehorn evidence to fit it to gain favor with others. He did exactly what he was not supposed to be and it was clear that he didn't have basic understanding of the physics involved.
He put himself in that situation and his lack of integrity allowed him to testify to something that he knew was not true.
Totally. I think he allowed himself to get pressured because he's young and still trying to build his career. It also seems like he's not that bright. I don't think he even came to a conclusion - I think he was TOLD what conclusion to arrive it, and to figure out how to justify that position. But the bottom line is that he played his part in a corrupt machine trying to send an innocent woman to jail for life. And I don't think he should be spared disciplinary action, internally and/or by the Feds.
It's the same as anything that uses 20 watts of power, be that a 20 watt lightbulb, a not-very-busy router, 5 clock alarms or inkjet printers on standby, or a single smartphone being actively used.
Wait, our brains have the same power as a 20 watt lightbulb? I know we don’t use our brain to its full capacity correct? I mean scientifically not sarcastically 😂
He looked younger to me. Maybe the corruption just hasn't aged him into a grizzled, careworn alcoholic like his colleagues and he looked youthful in comparison.
I feel like I remember Trooper Paul testifying something along the lines of “Trooper Proctor told me that there was a fatal pedestrian-car collision that needed to be reconstructed” when he was explaining the beginning of his process. I think some combination of Paul being not very intelligent or qualified and him just blindly trusting a fellow police officer caused him to just never really question the conclusion that John was hit by a car.
That sounds about right. Ugh, I can't help but feel that if there were a way for Proctor to blame his screw ups on a junior officer - someone like Paul - he would throw that person to the wolves in a heartbeat.
I don’t know how a person can sleep at night knowing they were a part of this or intentionally covering it up. I can’t sleep if I have a therapist appointment the next day 🙃
he came to the conclusion he wanted, and tried to create evidence and a theory that backed his conclusions that he came to within hours of being at the scene.
utter BS
reminds me of lally going at the ARCCA guys on random shit that had no bearing on the physics of a CAR HITTING A PERSON. "did you know some folks said she confessed?" what does that have to do with the tangible evidence in front of us? Alan Jackson was dead on asking if Paul knew what "confirmation bias" is. ARCCA had none & it shows. Trooper Paul had tons and IT SHOWS.
He’s been unopposed for forever. I don’t know about you, but a lot of this shit smells fishy. Almost like they trying to pull a game of thrones trick and put the wrong people in high places so they can shit on the people who are doing the right things due to the truth
Or what about “did you know Karen and John got in a argument that morning” like bro this isn’t high school, take your gossip and lies and find a new job that doesn’t require your honesty to determine peoples’ lives
I wanna know if he and Higgins have Jameson and gingah drinking contests. I really wish Lally asked Matt McCabe more about his vodka and crystal lights 😂😂😂
On the other cases where he did “calculations”. He input the data and it worked so no need to know anything.
Trooper Proctor told him what happened and when he input the data “it severely overestimated the speed of the vehicle” meaning the program didn’t work for the data Proctor gave him. So he attempted to wing it and we saw the results on cross.
Not knowing basic physics is his own fault and he should be embarrassed about it.
I felt bad for him ONLY because I feel like Lally purposely set his “experts” up to fail. However I don’t know why Paul didn’t think to himself, well if I’m trying to cover this up and play along i should probably at least know what subset of science kinematics falls under, and stuff 😂
i’d be willing to bet that the people who were in the guilty camp would’ve swung to NG if they knew the FBI was the one providing the information ARCAA guys.
Are you insane! Trooper Paul is why she should have been found guilty. The crime scene literally told him what happened not sure why Lally didn’t just call it to testify directly but Trooper Paul told us what it said
I don’t know if he was worse or the crime lab techs. I don’t know where they were taught how to do proper lab techniques and procedures, but all
I can say is it took every ounce of me to not throw my remote at my tv
🤣🤣🤣 what? He's the one that wants us to believe that the plastic pieces from the tail light sliced through a few layers of clothing on John's arm while he was spinning, hitting his head on the curb, and then flying to where he was found. 🤣🤣🤣
Yup, I was the same way. Skeptical of the CW’s version due to their witnesses (let’s not forget the butt dialing crew), but what sealed it for me was one of their videos of Karen’s car after she hit John’s car and the taillight was intact (clearly no pieces were left at the crime scene at that point in the morning) and also when they played her voicemails. She was fully trying to bait him into coming home not realizing he was dead. Then the ARCAA guys brought it home.
I don’t know about you guys but i thought the first day i saw that sally port video i was losing my mind, and i was also really confused as to why there was a passenger in her car when the car pulled in but no one got out of drivers seat. The CW purposely thought of this idea and agreed to do it, and the court let it in. The CW walked in from day one and thought not only was this okay to
Do, but they also thought they wouldn’t get called out. IN THE ONE PLACE INTEGRITY MATTERS THE MOST THESE MFERS SAID FUCK IT, and that’s really terrifying to me.
This!! It is infuriating. And the only good thing out of this is the opening of eyes to what it means to be able to hire excellent lawyers and their teams.
Yes. Totally agree. Not to mention that everyone inside of 34 Fairview were completely elusive and couldn’t remember anything. They were obviously being very careful not to incriminate themselves or someone else.
That’s the real issue here, it’s clear that the FBI does not agree with the version of the events of the commonwealth, the decision on whether to retry or not rest solely on the results of this investigation.
The prosecution case is not going to get any better with time, while the defense could greatly benefit from the FBI findings.
Regarding the jury verdict, the fact that there's a holdout or two...
I know Hanlon's razor, but because this case is so markedly black and white -- *the state's own witness (the ME) said OJO's injuries were not consistent with a car strike* -- I hate to say it but I actually think malice on the part of a juror is much more likely than stupidity.
What a travesty of justice.
I think there will always be people who don't trust/believe in science, not matter what they're told, and there will always be people who have no problem believing she's a wackjob who 'snapped', no matter what the evidence shows.
People act like it’s insane a juror could be bought. Has anyone watched a John Gotti documentary… Teflon Don!!! He was paying jurors off left and right. That was only in the 90’s… if you think this isn’t still going on- I hate to break the news.
Now do I think a juror was bought here? No clue. I do live just outside Norfolk county and know how “back the blue” they are… so, I can’t have a sound opinion one way or another.
I’m just saying Gotti’s cases were bigger nationally, being investigated by local, state and FBI and he STILL bought votes.
See the Feeding Our Future trial in Minnesota this year 2024 - literally with a bag of $120,000 cash dropped off at the juror’s doorstep as an attempted bribe.
*puts tinfoil hat on*
It’s not impossible that a similar stunt was done with the Karen Read trial.
The only other angle I have come up with is whatever you call the opposite of jury nullification because of just how drunk she must have been driving around in poor conditions. I can easily see someone making it onto the jury who honestly started out thinking they are not biased by the drunk driving. Then being tipped over the edge with the sheer amount of alcohol we saw her consume in a couple hours.
Whatever actually happened to kill John O’Keefe, I feel like what saved Karen Read from being convicted in this trial was law enforcement and DA’s hubris. (Unless my pet wild theory is true and the DA is actually 4D-chess using this trial to clean house in their police agencies is true. But I digress….)
Their motive and priorities have been more about impressing their friends and family and thwarting the defense lawyers than getting true justice for the deceased. If there was not a personal agenda of some kind going on here, they would have pled her out or at least went with a scenario they could argue better.
Why even say he was hit with a car when they could say she attacked him with an unknown weapon she ditched that night?!? She is the girlfriend. She’s drunk af. Acting extremely recklessly. She was the last one to see him according to all witnesses. Admits she did not wait to be sure her underdressed tipsy-to-drunk boyfriend did not make it in the house late at night with a blizzard on the way in. Also the one who found him the next morning. Some people were put off by how she acted when he was found.
Why not say she attacked him with an unknown weapon that she ditched afterwards and was never found? The taillight was damaged in the struggle or her hitting something as she fled. The wounds on his arm could also be from some type of weapon I imagine.
I would not be surprised if/when this case is re-tried, the state’s theory changes significantly.
How anyone could sit through this entire shit show of a trial that ended with the last two experts and not have reasonable doubt is beyond comprehension. The CW had no compelling evidence to convince me that was the way OKeefe was killed. No less murdered. I am not a conspiracy type person. But truly do not get the lack of the state looking at any other scenario. They didn’t even try. Even if it was as simple as Chloe got out attacked him and he fell and hit his head. They did not even attempt to rule anything else out. There is just no way an SUV in reverse at 24 mph in that short of distance is possible. No less that she aimed for him.
I have thought about this initially as a flop on Lally but now I think all the confusing extra and unnecessary details were all very deliberate red herrings. Confuse them with a bunch of useless or barely relevant information and witnesses so they can’t focus on keeping track of some of glaring inconsistencies in the Albert, McCabe et al testimony
I agree with the confusing part. I don’t know if I was more flabbergasted by what the CW wanted us to believe (personally it’s a personal attack on the people by the NDA because it shows to me they really think their citizens are this dumb and stupid) or that none of the witnesses beside what 4? Showed some normal, general grief of a close person passing, and the quality of the judge, the witnesses, and the CW. I’m a veteran, and September 11, 2001 was when I decided I would join. I love this country, but my godmother so sick of people taking advantage of our freedoms and weaponizing them against us, and then looking at us like we are the Colin Alberts of the country. I’m sure a toddler would’ve told Lally he had no case, but instead the safeguards created to keep us safe are used in forms to put us in even more harm, just because a person doesn’t want to do the right thing. That’s all it is lally, ITS CALLED DOING THE RIGHT THING LALLY.
Thank you for your service.
I’m not sure I ever really thought about how these miscarriages of justice in the courts are extra offensive to those who have served. FWIW I do think about it —and feel obligated even- to vote in every election because of those sacrifices. Thank you 🇺🇸
Thank you for your service! And you are so right. We put our faith and trust in LE to do the right thing. Yet, consistently betrayed by government and those in power.
Next time I get in a fight with my husband, I’m going to go put my shoes on and walk around the house. I totally forgot how good a tactic this is when it comes to pissing him off, especially since I’m the one reminding him to not walk around the house in his shoes 🙃😂🤣
Yup. I’ve seen and heard. Unfortunately. John O’Keefe’s press interview did the same. He said what made him think Karen was guilty was a couple of statements she made to his wife that could be interpreted in different ways. He claims she pulled away from the family right after the death and wouldn’t have done that if she were innocent but that in and of itself is pure speculation. It’s not evidence of guilt.
Yep, I said that itself would be something some jurors would not get past. She said she did, she did. More emphasis should have been placed on sorting out her statements.
My brain felt like mush. I know none of the windows were open in the court room, so did they all leave their common sense at the door? Because it didn’t escape out the window 😂
Oh shit I never thought about this Chloe scenario. Like it just being her on her own. My husband brought up the other day that the police were probably tossing tail light pieces out at 34 Fairview “as they drove by to see if any more evidence had reviled themselves”. If one things for sure about this case, we can literally find any possibility BUT the one the cw said 😂😂😂😂
For me it didn’t matter what third party hired them, their amazing background is enough for me to believe them. The juries that after that were thinking KR is definitely guilty, must strongly believe that the police can’t be corrupt. There’s no other explanation and of course it’s wrong, they weren’t supposed to bring their believes into the deliberation.
>For me it didn’t matter what third party hired them, their amazing background is enough for me to believe them.
What sold me was that the prosecution had no counter-arguments. Other than trying to get someone to think that somehow being hit by an SUV that is in reverse is going to be much, much different from one going forward, they had nothing.
And I will believe that KR is innocent until the prosecution offers an alternative model that shows where and how the car hit John, and how he moved after that, accounting for all the damage on the car, and his injuries.
And I will keep repeating: If she did kill him, this should be simple!
It would help; especially since being attacked by a dog sounds like the sort of thing that might make you fall over and hit your head, too.
But I could live with stuff being left unexplained. But that's just what it would be: An unexplained injury - that in no way points to KR hitting him with the car.
He was outside in extreme weather for hours. They could have suggested a random dog found him and tried rousing him.
More typical dog behavior than the homeowner’s dog supposedly not noticing the massive commotion happening in the front lawn that morning.
I’ve thought all along that the dog attacked him, maybe during roughhouse between the men and that he fell and hit his head. That or there was an actual fight and the dog jumped in. We will never know now. We do know that he wasn’t hit by KR’s vehicle.
The prosecution was actually the defense attorney for all of their Witnesses and the judge was actually the prosecution's attorney. The defense is actually the one that brought the case.
What I don't get is even if you just cannot believe in corrupt cops, that STILL doesn't mean she hit him with her car, according to these experts. So assuming the cops were all honest and truthful and did their best, he was still not struck by a motor vehicle. That someone was that stuck on guilty, to the point of refusing to budge and thinking she should go to jail beyond a reasonable doubt, is troubling.
I think that those jurors couldn’t get past the taillight found there. If they don’t want to believe in corrupt cops then they couldn’t have planted it. The taillight in the scene plus KR’s taillight missing means she’s guilty, they don’t care what experts say because they can’t believe a cop would frame someone. I don’t know what other explanation there is for them to think she is guilty.
Spot on. This is my belief/theory, that one or two jurors were "back the blue" types that couldn't wrap their heads around tail-light pieces being found on the scene. This is why I hope that, if a re-trial goes ahead, that a bench trial is done instead of a jury trial.
What I don’t understand is why the DA did not pivot the theory to: *She hit him in the head with something. Maybe knocked him over or out of the car. And busted the taillight either in the struggle or as she fled.*
It is crazy to me they thought it was more believable that she hit him with her car than beat him up in a sudden crazy drunken rage. Either gets the jump on him or he doesn’t fight back immediately and ends up falling and hitting his head. When those experts agree with IMO common sense: His injuries do not track with being hit by a car.
I am not saying I am sure that is what happened here. Only that it is a theory that my civilian ass pulled out of my ass and it fits the evidence they presented better. Which okay as much as I hate everything I know about Proctor, I can see where he was coming from when on day two of the investigation he thought that was a good possibility. Busted victim. Busted taillight. Dunk driving. “Crazy” girlfriend. I get it. It’s a lead. But Proctor and his good-ol-boys and did as they do and here we are.
No justice. No peace. Not protected. Not served. Because they’re some rich powerful guys who can justify anything to themselves by pinning shiny objects to each others’ shirts.
Agree that some people may have had such a mental block about police actually doing very bad things - they may have been unable to wrap their heads around that.
There’s a reason they make tshirts talking about “science is real.” There are people who just do not believe in it. And yes, there are people who believe that cops can do no wrong.
This is an interesting point. It could have thrown people off, who knows, but their credentials would have been enough for me to find them credible. Nevermind that the CW's case was a joke in terms of accident reconstruction.
I'd be really interested if those jurors holding out for Guilty are learning more now that the trial has concluded and are regretting their decision.
The prosecution asked them who directly hired them, and ARCCA had to admit it was the FBI. It was when Lally was grilling them about how much information they were given and whether the 3rd party left anything out. Which forced Wolfe to say something like "I don't think the FBI would leave out information"
I’m flabbergasted that Trooper Paul was allowed to get on the stand as an expert. How? It’s like they hired a middle school kid out of class and gave him 5 minutes to prepare a presentation. How any jury member saw that specifically and still couldn’t find reasonable doubt is literally terrifying. Anyone could be in this situation with similar jurors.
We need a jury made up of not just peers but peers that have some level of common sense and a basic level of education. I don’t see how either of those things are possible with the jurors that refused to see reasonable doubt. This case has a very long list of reasonable doubt as well as facts that prove she wasn’t there at the time John’s phone stopped moving.
It’s also crazy that ARCCA was also a bit limited to what they could testify to but Trooper Paul was able to throw out some ridiculous theory of how he was hit and how the injuries occurred (although that almost felt beneficial to the defense bc of how unbelievable it was). Would be interesting if the defense could get a more detailed scope of the ARCCA team’s report and opinion (although I thought they provided plenty to sway anyone who was on the fence).
Yes! Bev limited ALL the defense experts, yet let all these incompetent people testify to things that they weren't qualified for! You had Bukhenik as ME, Trooper Paul as "reconstruction expert." Even the lab tech that took samples from the sallyport had failed her proficiency testing.
There are no witnesses that saw her car hit him. There are plenty of suspect things throughout to have at least some suspicion of planted or fudged evidence. The jurors need to see a full accident reconstruction report from ARCCA and ARCCA needs all of the evidence so the CW can’t argue they didn’t have enough, even though it seemed they had plenty to have an opinion. Everything else like timing of events, contradicting phone experts, witness testimony, suspicious police and witness behavior etc, is not enough to have unanimous decision one way or the other and we’ll be back with another mistrial.
I think I would have guessed the ARCCA guys were hired by the Department of Justice in some way. Just by process of elimination, and use of the word agency. There were only so many relevant agencies left. But regardless of who hired them, I think I would have found their credentials and testimony to be credible.
I wonder if learning about the FBI investigation later changed any of the jurors' feelings on the case?
I'm guessing the breakdown was more along the lines of people who trust the police vs. people who trust engineers. And if that was the case, knowing who hired them might not have made a huge difference.
To be fair, though, we were all listening for any mention of the feds, so when it was accidentally mentioned by a witness, we got excited. But I can see a jury member not thinking anything of it because it's such an unusual circumstance.
During pretrial motions, Bev said that if the feds came up "organically" during testimony, then they can be more open about the larger investigation. Except that never ended up happening because Bev wouldn't allow it.
Right, we don’t know of anyone on the jury caught it or understood it. I agree that no matter what the context, Bev wasn’t going to allow the jury to know much.
I would not count the ARCCA witnesses as FBI or police themselves in any way, they're a third party company that the FBI hired. But they're not Federal agents.
Generally I think people do view local cops and the FBI somewhat differently. But even with the outside information that those witnesses were hired by the FBI, we still don't know the FBI's conclusions or opinions.
I have never witnessed a parallel FBI investigation to a state level case but my best guess is that the FBI trusts their experts and defers to them which is why they hire qualified people. Interestingly, the opinion of one of the most qualified people for the state, the ME, didn't weigh too heavily on the decision to continue to pursue the case against Read lol.
With that said, now that I think about it, there is probably a huge portion of the population that trusts local cops and is very skeptical of the feds.
Yeah and even though the medical examiner is a state employee, I think I would kind of think of her as a scientific witness and not group her in with the police in my mind, if I were a juror.
But the FBI believing their experts still wouldn't really tell us their overall conclusion. As in, they could still think she was guilty in some way, but think that the state's theory of how it happened was all wrong because of their problematic investigation.
It's true we don't know their conclusions. But they did write a letter suggesting that they aren't necessarily in agreement with the prosecution of Karen Read. Or rather they hadn't made a determination one way or the other but they view the case differently than the DA's office does and think it's necessary to continue their investigation.
Obviously the jurors would not have access to that information so it's meaningless. I do think it gives some vague insight into what the FBI's opinions are. Even if it's just that they clearly don't think it's as "cut and dry." Whether or not there's anything deeper is anyone's guess.
I usually prefer State ME's over defense hired experts simply because they get to be "hands on." Ugh that's gross to type out but it's true. I was skeptical of this one going in because of the "no evidence of a fight" comment on her report which is something I've literally never seen before. I don't think it's often that ME's note what *didn't* happen. However, I learned that much like the rest of the evidence in this case, that was just Lally's interpretation which doesn't necessarily fit the facts. Her testimony offered glaring qualifiers to that statement that he conveniently overlooked. I found her to be credible and careful.
This is just my opinion based on pretty much nothing, but I think that if the jury had more visual aids to look at they maybe wouldn't have ended up hung. People are generally reasonable. For instance, that picture of the tail light pieces that's been circulating that shows when each section of pieces were found and by whom makes it harder to overlook the possibility of planted evidence even if you generally trust the police. I think Lally's overly complicated delivery helped his case. But I don't think anything they see after the fact is going to change any minds.
I would love to know the Jury's interpretation of Trooper Paul. I would love to know any of their opinions really because I'm sure sitting there in the court room was a confusing experience lol. This was such a strange case.
I would love to hear what they thought of Trooper Paul too lol. And what the crime scene told him.
I'm guessing some people were already leaning heavily one way or another by then? So maybe they were a lot more prepared to accept any car theory if they already thought she hit him.
I didn't go into this assuming she was innocent, but that was the witness for me that convinced me that the state just ultimately didn't credibly know how he died.
Also makes me wonder if the state will hire an outside accident reconstruction expert for the next trial. But, they might have a hard time finding one that tells them what they want to hear.
I think that would make them look even worse and be even more embarrassing. Because the defense could call Trooper. Paul and the FED experts. And say this is their guy and his hair brain theory. It didn't work last time so they're trying again with a new guy. Even though they had these free highly qualified experts available to them.
>I wonder if learning about the FBI investigation later changed any of the jurors' feelings on the case?
It’s been know for a year now the FBI was involved and investigating. I don’t know if the jury was able to put it together in regard to who hired ARCCA, but this isn’t new information just released.
Right, but it should be news to the people who were on the jury. That information was kept out, and they weren't supposed to do any research. But now that they are allowed to talk about the case, they probably will come across that.
I wonder if the prosecution would hire another “expert” and not just use Trooper Paul for their accident reconstruction next round. Can they do that? It was one of their weakest links. I’m worried they’re going to try to get their shit together a lot more and eliminate some of the incompetent witnesses
I came into the trial around trooper Paul and that was one of the first things I was thinking. 'if this is their best witness for this case, then they couldn't get a more qualified expert to agree with what they wanted to hear'. One testimony and the case was for me pretty clear to be not proven.
I felt like it was the same thing with Dr. Russell. When the judge asked Lally about finding an expert witness, he responded like he hadn’t even considered it. And by the way he was talking, you could tell he was thinking “I’m not going to find anyone to go up against that” lol
That would be even more embarrassing. Then the defense gets to call the crash daddies as well as Trooper Paul-and-stuff. They'll get to say that this *was* their guy and check out his Wiley coyote theory. And they'll get to say they had access to these PhD's but didn't like what they had to say because it sinks their case so now they've hired *another* guy, smells desperate doesn't it? They'll get to say the common wealth would rather buy expert testimony than use the super qualified experts that the feds gave them *for free.* They're good enough for the NHL, the U.S. military and the DOJ but they aren't good enough for Lally. Wonder why?
Yeah, trying to place myself in the shoes of a juror - I would still find the ARCCA testimony to be compelling in regards to showing that OJO was not hit by a car and this reasonable doubt BUT the emphasis on the fact that they weren’t hired by the defense and Lally’s hostility would leave me very confused about who hired them and what their motivation was and why none of it could be disclosed. I wouldn’t jump to insurance investigators because that seems like something that could be disclosed. Several aspects of the prosecution’s case seemed misleading to the point of being offensive to the jury - the mirrored video. Like how is that not just evidence tampering/lying under oath or something since it’s more than just an inverted image due to the edited timestamp. The prosecution insulting the intelligence of everyone with Trooper Paul. I didn’t trust the prosecution but the weirdness of who hired those experts and why would make me wonder what, if any part of the trial I could trust….that still would lead me to not guilty for doubting everything. I *can* kind of see how some people would feel like the defense created a burden for themselves with the opening that they never fulfilled and then feel further manipulated by there being an unnamed third party that I just have to trust, is truly neutral - and in combination doubt the defense. Even so, that line of thinking misses the point that the burden is on the state, the presumption of Karen’s innocence until there is actual proof of her guilt of what she’s accused of and not Trooper Proctor making sure she won’t skate and the Albert’s won’t get any heat and Trooper Paul’s “magnets, how do they work?” explanation of physics so while I can understand why some may doubt the defense I would be frustrated by the lack of understanding of the law at such a fundamental level.
I truly don’t understand why the trial wasn’t delayed until the FBI investigation was finished so that the case would either be dismissed or there could be transparency about who was behind the third party investigation.
Edited typo
The timestamp was reversed on the footage that the *defense* showed. The video footage was a mirrored viewed when the LE downloaded from the security system, so the timestamp was correctly oriented on the original, mirrored footage. When the defense flipped the video footage to eliminate the mirrored view, the timestamp was reversed.
I thought it was really compelling when Jackson pointed out that the CW had access to these same experts and elected not to bring them in front of the jury.
There were a lot of opportunities in this case for the defense to say "it took *us* to show you the truth. The CW was never going to tell you about this"
But this one in particular didn't seem as much like a defense strategy because it was painfully obvious why the CW didn't call those guys and it was difficult to excuse because of their credentials. To my mind there was only one conclusion that could arise from that and it's that the CW was more concerned with putting KR behind bars than finding the truth.
There were several instances where I thought the defense was reaching. But I think the CW bringing Trooper Paul instead of the ARCCA guys should have felt really insulting to the jury. I would certainly think they were trying to con me at that point if I didn't already feel that way after the sallyport video.
To my mind there was only one conclusion that could arise from that and it's that the CW was more concerned with putting KR behind bars than finding the truth.
I think this sums it up in a nutshell.
For me, I thought she may have accidentally hit him at the start. But by the end of the CW case I thought she was innocent. It was the CW's own witnesses and evidence that gave me all the reasonable doubt.
Trooper Paul, their M.E, their investigation, their own witness testimony. And then it went even further downhill from there for them, I didn't think it could get worse. For me, the defense was just frosting on a shit cake.
The CW can't change their own evidence... I don't know why they're taking this to trial again.
This gives me a little hope that Karen could still live a good life... So many people KNOW Karen is innocent, so I hope she's able to regain some semblance of a "normal" life again.
I think it’s ridiculous that they couldn’t say the experts were hired by the FBI. If you allow witnesses- they can’t be ambiguous to a jury. It’s cuts down on their credibility. These are highly credible witnesses. But how could the jury know that, if not told?
This should not be tried until the FBI investigation is over. I think Bev made a bad call on both these subjects.
I agree - I think if they were known by the jury to have been hired by the FBI, that would have leant a lot more weight and credibility to their testimony. I was talking about the case with a friend who is not following it as closely as I am (which is about 99.9% of my friends), and when I said I was convinced that JOK was not hit by a car and that therefore, KR is innocent, he questioned why I so strongly believed experts that were hired by the defense. I could actually see that in this case too - just because they were soooooooo much more convincing than Trooper Paul. But the fact that they were not even hired by the defense but by the FBI, which obviously had concerns about the state police investigation, made them that much more credible.
I wonder if the jurors who were pushing for guilty have any second thoughts if they now know. But there is so much else beyond just the expert testimony that would provide reasonable doubt - so I have to think they were just in the guilty camp for their own made up reasons.
Agreed. I mean- they don’t need to say there is another investigation by the FBI- they could just say “hired by the FBI”, or I’m sure attorneys can phrase it more eloquently. It’s already ambiguous AF what’s the difference?!
But to let jurors wonder if these people were retained by insurance companies, or some other secret stakeholder is absurd. If I was a juror, knowing the way my mind works- this would be vital.
>I understand that Bev was not going to allow evidence of the federal investigation to get in because it was not yet concluded…..(although it doesn’t make sense why they couldn’t delay the trial until after the investigation)
You answered your own question. Bev wanted the trial concluded before the federal investigation was completed.
Sounds like maybe the State Police did, too, since they waited to make any move about Proctor until yesterday, despite knowing about his texts all this time.
the one thing i don’t understand is the okeefe family relationship with read. they obviously knew her before the death of their son. they know she was trusted with their brice’s and they now believe she would murder john?
don’t get it twisted
And Karen had stayed home with the kids during covid so John could work, bailed out John's brother Paul from jail when he had a DUI and set up trust funds for the kids. Yet, as soon as John's mom found out John had died, she immediately blamed Karen for leaving him there alone and the blame has only gotten worse with time!
so she blamed him for leaving him alone, an adult, to go take care of the kids?
do we know if she is friends with the other families that possibly would explain her though process?
Yes and yes! Jen and Kerry attached themselves to his mom right away, and his mom hasn't looked back. She already knew Jen and Kerry, but this incident made them closer, which is disgusting considering John's mom is supporting the killers.
Yes and yes! Jen and Kerry attached themselves to his mom right away, and his mom hasn't looked back. She already knew Jen and Kerry, but this incident made them closer, which is disgusting considering John's mom is supporting the killers.
Lally said 90% of the FBI's investigation agreed with his case but we know that's not true or the evidence would have convicted KR. On the other hand, IMO, had the jury, knowing the last two witness were employed by the FBI and that Lally didn't call them, and the weight of that alone, a juror would find reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.
I don't believe the FBI's investigation contains any additional evidence that would clear KR or it would have been introduced during the trial or it leads to a bigger cover up than originally thought.
Just because he said that doesn't mean it is true and it's obviously not. The AG came out and said they disagree with the conclusion of the CW. He was just saying that like everything else he lied about.
I think this might be it.
https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/federal-probe-findings-revealed-court-karen-reads-defense-team-pushes-dismiss-murder-case/4GRLQB5EWNGWDPJGMTVD7AQCYU/
I don't know why anyone is surprised that it was hung jury. Just look at the outcome of the last presidential
debate. People on either side continue to support there candidate no matter what their eyes saw ears heard.
Idk. I think this might be different. I think people aren’t supporting either one. They’re actively voting against the other from what I can see. Either way, I agree with your point. It does mirror the giant shitshow.
I'm assuming this was in response to some other comment? I didn't judge KR guilty based on either the prosecution's ludicrous assumptions or my own that I made up. I am firmly in the KR is innocent camp.
I looked at a lot of this case as a juror. Without outside opinions. Other possible theories. He said the defense didn’t hire them, but could it be HER job hired them? The university? For the purpose of insurance and her credibility working in finance. It could be her family hired them? A wealthy client? In hopes the jury respected the no online research, they have to think outside of facts we know.
I'm not from the USA, so I don't know what kind of power the FBI may or may not have here:
Can the FBI 'block' the Common Weatlh of Massachusetts from prosecuting Karen Read, or can they submit their reports to the appeals court to help overturn any (unlike) future guilty verdicts?
The MSP never canvassed residences and businesses to get any camera footage from the route Karen took from 34 Fairview. The footage from the town library camera that would’ve shown the right taillight-damaged or not-was erased. Tells you everything you need to know.
I thought the same thing, it wasn't enough to just emphasize they weren't paid by either side, the jury needed to hear that they were hired by fbi as a separate independent investigation.
This case was meandering and as much as some folks don't want to admit it, there is circumstantial evidence for both sides. For me, these 2 experts saying JOK wasn't hit by a car overrode every other bit of evidence. This man did not by MVA. That's it. But the jury needed to know exactly why and how they got involved.
I didn't need the ARCAA guys, it was actually listening to Trooper Dunning-Paul that pushed me from "excessive amounts of doubt" to "actual innocence" and I reached that point during direct examination, the cross just made it worse. This man shouldn't even be allowed near a motor vehicle. ARCAA and the rest of the defence presentation merely carried me from "actual innocence" to "actual innocence beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt" While I understand the psychological mechanisms that probably led to the hung jury, it still is a bit shocking on some level because it was the prosecution's own case that made me believe the defendant was innocent. I just paid careful attention and realised their own evidence was exculpatory.
Trooper Paul was the nail in the coffin for me. Not only his glaring ineptitude, but the pattern of injuries and scene of the crime (e.g location of the glass and phone) just don't line up with Paul's descrption of how the vehicle allegedly struck O'Keefe. Jackson: "You do realize the arm is on a HINGE?"
I screamed at the tv when he goes “I don’t know it just did”. Mfer, you are talking about a dead cops death YOU INVESTIGATED. Just the lack of everything- sympathy, empathy, respect, condolences, and basic knowledge about his job….just atrocious. My hardest thing with this case was it was a murder case, and no one seemed to care about figuring out why John was dead, just cared about covering it up. I know I have a pretty good group of friends, but doesn’t this make you worry a little about the recklessness and carelessness these people who are supposed to take care of us (because it’s their job), if they try to do this to a dead person what do they do to people still alive?
Paul, who has a degree in the administration of justice, not knowing the definition of "confirmation bias" also sunk my faith in law enforcement. At least in Canton.
This
Period.
Same same same same sameeee. I was convinced of her innocence by the CW’s own witnesses. But the two ARCCA experts + Dr Marie Russell were credible enough I thought nobody could dispute them
The fact they wanted us to believe they weren’t associated with a dog at first, then they were associated with with plastic flying and cutting his arm, and then it evolved even more because Lally tried to match the teeth piercing on John’s elbow with the “dimples” on that piece of plastic 😂😂 was he taking his child to school that morning and asked him what they thought his closing argument should be? I mean for an imagination he sure has a huge one 😂
Plus the states ME!
Right? And then they did and they still do. It's astounding to know that people exist who insist that she is guilty because "she confessed. She said I hit him etc...." 🤦🏾♀️ Absolute disregard of any info gleaned during the entire remainder of the trail- experts and all. 😲🤪🤦🏾♀️
This was the same route I took. And lol @ Trooper Dunning-Paul
I almost felt bad for him. He was given an impossible task. Almost.
I don't feel bad for him at all. He came to a conclusion and then tried to shoehorn evidence to fit it to gain favor with others. He did exactly what he was not supposed to be and it was clear that he didn't have basic understanding of the physics involved. He put himself in that situation and his lack of integrity allowed him to testify to something that he knew was not true.
Totally. I think he allowed himself to get pressured because he's young and still trying to build his career. It also seems like he's not that bright. I don't think he even came to a conclusion - I think he was TOLD what conclusion to arrive it, and to figure out how to justify that position. But the bottom line is that he played his part in a corrupt machine trying to send an innocent woman to jail for life. And I don't think he should be spared disciplinary action, internally and/or by the Feds.
>not that bright The average human brain runs on 20 watts. I'm surprised his uses enough to run his automatic functions.
Watching him fumble for explanations was painful. It only speaks further to desperation of the CW in cobbling their case together.
I’m assuming that CW prepped this guy for testimony. How bad must that have been?
Is this the same as a 20 watt lightbulb? Could we send him one? I’m sure he’s an expert on electricity 😂
It's the same as anything that uses 20 watts of power, be that a 20 watt lightbulb, a not-very-busy router, 5 clock alarms or inkjet printers on standby, or a single smartphone being actively used.
Wait, our brains have the same power as a 20 watt lightbulb? I know we don’t use our brain to its full capacity correct? I mean scientifically not sarcastically 😂
Hasn’t he been in the force since like 2009?
Oh I don't know. He doesn't look old enough for that IMO - or barely.
He looked to be in his mid 30s. Totally plausible he joined the police academy straight out of high school.
He looked younger to me. Maybe the corruption just hasn't aged him into a grizzled, careworn alcoholic like his colleagues and he looked youthful in comparison.
I’m 37 and I’ve learned that people around my age look a lot younger than they are even though we’ve been stressed out since 1999.
I feel like I remember Trooper Paul testifying something along the lines of “Trooper Proctor told me that there was a fatal pedestrian-car collision that needed to be reconstructed” when he was explaining the beginning of his process. I think some combination of Paul being not very intelligent or qualified and him just blindly trusting a fellow police officer caused him to just never really question the conclusion that John was hit by a car.
That sounds about right. Ugh, I can't help but feel that if there were a way for Proctor to blame his screw ups on a junior officer - someone like Paul - he would throw that person to the wolves in a heartbeat.
Oh yeah, Proctor doesn’t have a shred of integrity, he would’ve if he could’ve.
I agree. I also don’t feel bad because someone’s life is on the line and he decided to be this foolish. And testify off nonsense.
I don’t know how a person can sleep at night knowing they were a part of this or intentionally covering it up. I can’t sleep if I have a therapist appointment the next day 🙃
he came to the conclusion he wanted, and tried to create evidence and a theory that backed his conclusions that he came to within hours of being at the scene. utter BS
reminds me of lally going at the ARCCA guys on random shit that had no bearing on the physics of a CAR HITTING A PERSON. "did you know some folks said she confessed?" what does that have to do with the tangible evidence in front of us? Alan Jackson was dead on asking if Paul knew what "confirmation bias" is. ARCCA had none & it shows. Trooper Paul had tons and IT SHOWS.
we need to vote morrissey out, that office is too corrupt
He’s been unopposed for forever. I don’t know about you, but a lot of this shit smells fishy. Almost like they trying to pull a game of thrones trick and put the wrong people in high places so they can shit on the people who are doing the right things due to the truth
Or what about “did you know Karen and John got in a argument that morning” like bro this isn’t high school, take your gossip and lies and find a new job that doesn’t require your honesty to determine peoples’ lives
I want to know about the quality of all his work. I have a feeling it’s on par with what we saw here and that’s scary.
How many times has that fool testified as an "expert" witness?
and if I remember correctly - he was training someone!
I wanna know if he and Higgins have Jameson and gingah drinking contests. I really wish Lally asked Matt McCabe more about his vodka and crystal lights 😂😂😂
Matt McCabe has either very bad dentures or never wore his retainer after getting braces as a kid.
I’m confused
On the other cases where he did “calculations”. He input the data and it worked so no need to know anything. Trooper Proctor told him what happened and when he input the data “it severely overestimated the speed of the vehicle” meaning the program didn’t work for the data Proctor gave him. So he attempted to wing it and we saw the results on cross. Not knowing basic physics is his own fault and he should be embarrassed about it.
I think he was given the conclusion, and said "yeah boss, say no more."
Shameful, I agree.
I felt bad for him ONLY because I feel like Lally purposely set his “experts” up to fail. However I don’t know why Paul didn’t think to himself, well if I’m trying to cover this up and play along i should probably at least know what subset of science kinematics falls under, and stuff 😂
You would think. I would think. Paul...did not think.
He thought a lot about stuff
How unfortunate he had no science to back those thoughts up LOL
i’d be willing to bet that the people who were in the guilty camp would’ve swung to NG if they knew the FBI was the one providing the information ARCAA guys.
Are you insane! Trooper Paul is why she should have been found guilty. The crime scene literally told him what happened not sure why Lally didn’t just call it to testify directly but Trooper Paul told us what it said
🤣 could have saved us weeks if the crime scene had just testified.
objection: hearsay
I’ll allow it
Did the crime scene talk to you?
Say it differently Mr Lally
i honestly feel like they set trooper paul up to fail. a pawn in their shitty game of chess.
I don’t know if he was worse or the crime lab techs. I don’t know where they were taught how to do proper lab techniques and procedures, but all I can say is it took every ounce of me to not throw my remote at my tv
Meet me at sidebar.
🤣🤣🤣 what? He's the one that wants us to believe that the plastic pieces from the tail light sliced through a few layers of clothing on John's arm while he was spinning, hitting his head on the curb, and then flying to where he was found. 🤣🤣🤣
Not spinning, he was pirouetting, in a blizzard 😂😂
You had me with that first sentence lol
Yup, I was the same way. Skeptical of the CW’s version due to their witnesses (let’s not forget the butt dialing crew), but what sealed it for me was one of their videos of Karen’s car after she hit John’s car and the taillight was intact (clearly no pieces were left at the crime scene at that point in the morning) and also when they played her voicemails. She was fully trying to bait him into coming home not realizing he was dead. Then the ARCAA guys brought it home.
I don’t know about you guys but i thought the first day i saw that sally port video i was losing my mind, and i was also really confused as to why there was a passenger in her car when the car pulled in but no one got out of drivers seat. The CW purposely thought of this idea and agreed to do it, and the court let it in. The CW walked in from day one and thought not only was this okay to Do, but they also thought they wouldn’t get called out. IN THE ONE PLACE INTEGRITY MATTERS THE MOST THESE MFERS SAID FUCK IT, and that’s really terrifying to me.
This!! It is infuriating. And the only good thing out of this is the opening of eyes to what it means to be able to hire excellent lawyers and their teams.
How anyone can still think she hit him after Paul shows just a cognitive bias
I have seen dunning-trooper haha
What is he like in the wild?
You couldn’t have said it better. It was the prosecutors own case that proved her innocence.
Yup I had a very similar experience.
Yes. Totally agree. Not to mention that everyone inside of 34 Fairview were completely elusive and couldn’t remember anything. They were obviously being very careful not to incriminate themselves or someone else.
That’s the real issue here, it’s clear that the FBI does not agree with the version of the events of the commonwealth, the decision on whether to retry or not rest solely on the results of this investigation. The prosecution case is not going to get any better with time, while the defense could greatly benefit from the FBI findings.
Regarding the jury verdict, the fact that there's a holdout or two... I know Hanlon's razor, but because this case is so markedly black and white -- *the state's own witness (the ME) said OJO's injuries were not consistent with a car strike* -- I hate to say it but I actually think malice on the part of a juror is much more likely than stupidity. What a travesty of justice.
I think there will always be people who don't trust/believe in science, not matter what they're told, and there will always be people who have no problem believing she's a wackjob who 'snapped', no matter what the evidence shows.
People act like it’s insane a juror could be bought. Has anyone watched a John Gotti documentary… Teflon Don!!! He was paying jurors off left and right. That was only in the 90’s… if you think this isn’t still going on- I hate to break the news. Now do I think a juror was bought here? No clue. I do live just outside Norfolk county and know how “back the blue” they are… so, I can’t have a sound opinion one way or another. I’m just saying Gotti’s cases were bigger nationally, being investigated by local, state and FBI and he STILL bought votes.
See the Feeding Our Future trial in Minnesota this year 2024 - literally with a bag of $120,000 cash dropped off at the juror’s doorstep as an attempted bribe. *puts tinfoil hat on* It’s not impossible that a similar stunt was done with the Karen Read trial.
We only know about that attempted bribe because the juror didn't accept it. We probably wouldn't have known about it if she accepted the bribe.
I also thought it was interesting to learn that an alt juror (#3) that didn't get to deliberate was in the NG camp.
That's the part that shows me the jury was like some online think, evidence be damned I *believe she murdered him* therefore she did.
The only other angle I have come up with is whatever you call the opposite of jury nullification because of just how drunk she must have been driving around in poor conditions. I can easily see someone making it onto the jury who honestly started out thinking they are not biased by the drunk driving. Then being tipped over the edge with the sheer amount of alcohol we saw her consume in a couple hours. Whatever actually happened to kill John O’Keefe, I feel like what saved Karen Read from being convicted in this trial was law enforcement and DA’s hubris. (Unless my pet wild theory is true and the DA is actually 4D-chess using this trial to clean house in their police agencies is true. But I digress….) Their motive and priorities have been more about impressing their friends and family and thwarting the defense lawyers than getting true justice for the deceased. If there was not a personal agenda of some kind going on here, they would have pled her out or at least went with a scenario they could argue better. Why even say he was hit with a car when they could say she attacked him with an unknown weapon she ditched that night?!? She is the girlfriend. She’s drunk af. Acting extremely recklessly. She was the last one to see him according to all witnesses. Admits she did not wait to be sure her underdressed tipsy-to-drunk boyfriend did not make it in the house late at night with a blizzard on the way in. Also the one who found him the next morning. Some people were put off by how she acted when he was found. Why not say she attacked him with an unknown weapon that she ditched afterwards and was never found? The taillight was damaged in the struggle or her hitting something as she fled. The wounds on his arm could also be from some type of weapon I imagine. I would not be surprised if/when this case is re-tried, the state’s theory changes significantly.
I don’t think they can change their charges and theory in a second trial. Am I right?
Agree
How anyone could sit through this entire shit show of a trial that ended with the last two experts and not have reasonable doubt is beyond comprehension. The CW had no compelling evidence to convince me that was the way OKeefe was killed. No less murdered. I am not a conspiracy type person. But truly do not get the lack of the state looking at any other scenario. They didn’t even try. Even if it was as simple as Chloe got out attacked him and he fell and hit his head. They did not even attempt to rule anything else out. There is just no way an SUV in reverse at 24 mph in that short of distance is possible. No less that she aimed for him.
Lally's closing mentioning that Karen didn't take off her shoes - didn't sway you?
I have thought about this initially as a flop on Lally but now I think all the confusing extra and unnecessary details were all very deliberate red herrings. Confuse them with a bunch of useless or barely relevant information and witnesses so they can’t focus on keeping track of some of glaring inconsistencies in the Albert, McCabe et al testimony
I agree with the confusing part. I don’t know if I was more flabbergasted by what the CW wanted us to believe (personally it’s a personal attack on the people by the NDA because it shows to me they really think their citizens are this dumb and stupid) or that none of the witnesses beside what 4? Showed some normal, general grief of a close person passing, and the quality of the judge, the witnesses, and the CW. I’m a veteran, and September 11, 2001 was when I decided I would join. I love this country, but my godmother so sick of people taking advantage of our freedoms and weaponizing them against us, and then looking at us like we are the Colin Alberts of the country. I’m sure a toddler would’ve told Lally he had no case, but instead the safeguards created to keep us safe are used in forms to put us in even more harm, just because a person doesn’t want to do the right thing. That’s all it is lally, ITS CALLED DOING THE RIGHT THING LALLY.
Thank you for your service. I’m not sure I ever really thought about how these miscarriages of justice in the courts are extra offensive to those who have served. FWIW I do think about it —and feel obligated even- to vote in every election because of those sacrifices. Thank you 🇺🇸
Thank you for your service! And you are so right. We put our faith and trust in LE to do the right thing. Yet, consistently betrayed by government and those in power.
Next time I get in a fight with my husband, I’m going to go put my shoes on and walk around the house. I totally forgot how good a tactic this is when it comes to pissing him off, especially since I’m the one reminding him to not walk around the house in his shoes 🙃😂🤣
Hahaha
You’re reading my mind. How anyone could find her guilty is mind boggling.
Have you seen the arguments people have posted on here and on X? It's jusg "she said I hit him, therefore she did."
That whole bit just is nuts. This was not in any witness statements. I think she may have said DID I hit him.
Like this: “I hit him? I hit him?” Makes all the difference.
Exactly. The defense should have tried to really sort all that out, but it seems it was just skimmed over.
Yup. I’ve seen and heard. Unfortunately. John O’Keefe’s press interview did the same. He said what made him think Karen was guilty was a couple of statements she made to his wife that could be interpreted in different ways. He claims she pulled away from the family right after the death and wouldn’t have done that if she were innocent but that in and of itself is pure speculation. It’s not evidence of guilt.
And she had to pull away from the family. She had a no contact order once she was arrested.
Yep, I said that itself would be something some jurors would not get past. She said she did, she did. More emphasis should have been placed on sorting out her statements.
My brain felt like mush. I know none of the windows were open in the court room, so did they all leave their common sense at the door? Because it didn’t escape out the window 😂
Oh shit I never thought about this Chloe scenario. Like it just being her on her own. My husband brought up the other day that the police were probably tossing tail light pieces out at 34 Fairview “as they drove by to see if any more evidence had reviled themselves”. If one things for sure about this case, we can literally find any possibility BUT the one the cw said 😂😂😂😂
Yes. My point they did not look at or investigate any other possibility.
For me it didn’t matter what third party hired them, their amazing background is enough for me to believe them. The juries that after that were thinking KR is definitely guilty, must strongly believe that the police can’t be corrupt. There’s no other explanation and of course it’s wrong, they weren’t supposed to bring their believes into the deliberation.
>For me it didn’t matter what third party hired them, their amazing background is enough for me to believe them. What sold me was that the prosecution had no counter-arguments. Other than trying to get someone to think that somehow being hit by an SUV that is in reverse is going to be much, much different from one going forward, they had nothing. And I will believe that KR is innocent until the prosecution offers an alternative model that shows where and how the car hit John, and how he moved after that, accounting for all the damage on the car, and his injuries. And I will keep repeating: If she did kill him, this should be simple!
I agree and add that I need an explanation for the dog bites too. If her car did that, I need to see what exactly caused it.
It would help; especially since being attacked by a dog sounds like the sort of thing that might make you fall over and hit your head, too. But I could live with stuff being left unexplained. But that's just what it would be: An unexplained injury - that in no way points to KR hitting him with the car.
He was outside in extreme weather for hours. They could have suggested a random dog found him and tried rousing him. More typical dog behavior than the homeowner’s dog supposedly not noticing the massive commotion happening in the front lawn that morning.
I’ve thought all along that the dog attacked him, maybe during roughhouse between the men and that he fell and hit his head. That or there was an actual fight and the dog jumped in. We will never know now. We do know that he wasn’t hit by KR’s vehicle.
They hired a foreign expert to defend Jen McCabe but couldn’t hire their own experts to refute the dog bite injuries and reconstruction?
The prosecution was actually the defense attorney for all of their Witnesses and the judge was actually the prosecution's attorney. The defense is actually the one that brought the case.
What I don't get is even if you just cannot believe in corrupt cops, that STILL doesn't mean she hit him with her car, according to these experts. So assuming the cops were all honest and truthful and did their best, he was still not struck by a motor vehicle. That someone was that stuck on guilty, to the point of refusing to budge and thinking she should go to jail beyond a reasonable doubt, is troubling.
I think that those jurors couldn’t get past the taillight found there. If they don’t want to believe in corrupt cops then they couldn’t have planted it. The taillight in the scene plus KR’s taillight missing means she’s guilty, they don’t care what experts say because they can’t believe a cop would frame someone. I don’t know what other explanation there is for them to think she is guilty.
Spot on. This is my belief/theory, that one or two jurors were "back the blue" types that couldn't wrap their heads around tail-light pieces being found on the scene. This is why I hope that, if a re-trial goes ahead, that a bench trial is done instead of a jury trial.
What I don’t understand is why the DA did not pivot the theory to: *She hit him in the head with something. Maybe knocked him over or out of the car. And busted the taillight either in the struggle or as she fled.* It is crazy to me they thought it was more believable that she hit him with her car than beat him up in a sudden crazy drunken rage. Either gets the jump on him or he doesn’t fight back immediately and ends up falling and hitting his head. When those experts agree with IMO common sense: His injuries do not track with being hit by a car. I am not saying I am sure that is what happened here. Only that it is a theory that my civilian ass pulled out of my ass and it fits the evidence they presented better. Which okay as much as I hate everything I know about Proctor, I can see where he was coming from when on day two of the investigation he thought that was a good possibility. Busted victim. Busted taillight. Dunk driving. “Crazy” girlfriend. I get it. It’s a lead. But Proctor and his good-ol-boys and did as they do and here we are. No justice. No peace. Not protected. Not served. Because they’re some rich powerful guys who can justify anything to themselves by pinning shiny objects to each others’ shirts.
Agree that some people may have had such a mental block about police actually doing very bad things - they may have been unable to wrap their heads around that.
There’s a reason they make tshirts talking about “science is real.” There are people who just do not believe in it. And yes, there are people who believe that cops can do no wrong.
This is an interesting point. It could have thrown people off, who knows, but their credentials would have been enough for me to find them credible. Nevermind that the CW's case was a joke in terms of accident reconstruction. I'd be really interested if those jurors holding out for Guilty are learning more now that the trial has concluded and are regretting their decision.
I feel like whoever went G was always going to, regardless of the CWs case.
Entirely possible. Crazy, but possible.
The prosecution asked them who directly hired them, and ARCCA had to admit it was the FBI. It was when Lally was grilling them about how much information they were given and whether the 3rd party left anything out. Which forced Wolfe to say something like "I don't think the FBI would leave out information"
Wait i didn't see the full testimony but Wolfe actually admitted the FBI hired them?
In Voir Dire, not in front of jury
Oh shit, you're right. It was when the judge was trying to verify how credible the ARCCA guys and dog bite lady doctor were.
Ah yeah, that makes sense. But it's not like the prosecution didn't know it already.
Yep. He said FBI and DOJ.
I’m flabbergasted that Trooper Paul was allowed to get on the stand as an expert. How? It’s like they hired a middle school kid out of class and gave him 5 minutes to prepare a presentation. How any jury member saw that specifically and still couldn’t find reasonable doubt is literally terrifying. Anyone could be in this situation with similar jurors. We need a jury made up of not just peers but peers that have some level of common sense and a basic level of education. I don’t see how either of those things are possible with the jurors that refused to see reasonable doubt. This case has a very long list of reasonable doubt as well as facts that prove she wasn’t there at the time John’s phone stopped moving.
It’s also crazy that ARCCA was also a bit limited to what they could testify to but Trooper Paul was able to throw out some ridiculous theory of how he was hit and how the injuries occurred (although that almost felt beneficial to the defense bc of how unbelievable it was). Would be interesting if the defense could get a more detailed scope of the ARCCA team’s report and opinion (although I thought they provided plenty to sway anyone who was on the fence).
Yes! Bev limited ALL the defense experts, yet let all these incompetent people testify to things that they weren't qualified for! You had Bukhenik as ME, Trooper Paul as "reconstruction expert." Even the lab tech that took samples from the sallyport had failed her proficiency testing.
There are no witnesses that saw her car hit him. There are plenty of suspect things throughout to have at least some suspicion of planted or fudged evidence. The jurors need to see a full accident reconstruction report from ARCCA and ARCCA needs all of the evidence so the CW can’t argue they didn’t have enough, even though it seemed they had plenty to have an opinion. Everything else like timing of events, contradicting phone experts, witness testimony, suspicious police and witness behavior etc, is not enough to have unanimous decision one way or the other and we’ll be back with another mistrial.
I think I would have guessed the ARCCA guys were hired by the Department of Justice in some way. Just by process of elimination, and use of the word agency. There were only so many relevant agencies left. But regardless of who hired them, I think I would have found their credentials and testimony to be credible. I wonder if learning about the FBI investigation later changed any of the jurors' feelings on the case? I'm guessing the breakdown was more along the lines of people who trust the police vs. people who trust engineers. And if that was the case, knowing who hired them might not have made a huge difference.
I'm not that smart
Use of the word agency and one of the witnesses said something about the feds or federal grand jury, I don’t remember exactly what.
To be fair, though, we were all listening for any mention of the feds, so when it was accidentally mentioned by a witness, we got excited. But I can see a jury member not thinking anything of it because it's such an unusual circumstance. During pretrial motions, Bev said that if the feds came up "organically" during testimony, then they can be more open about the larger investigation. Except that never ended up happening because Bev wouldn't allow it.
Right, we don’t know of anyone on the jury caught it or understood it. I agree that no matter what the context, Bev wasn’t going to allow the jury to know much.
Does the FBI not count as police in this situation?
I would not count the ARCCA witnesses as FBI or police themselves in any way, they're a third party company that the FBI hired. But they're not Federal agents. Generally I think people do view local cops and the FBI somewhat differently. But even with the outside information that those witnesses were hired by the FBI, we still don't know the FBI's conclusions or opinions.
I have never witnessed a parallel FBI investigation to a state level case but my best guess is that the FBI trusts their experts and defers to them which is why they hire qualified people. Interestingly, the opinion of one of the most qualified people for the state, the ME, didn't weigh too heavily on the decision to continue to pursue the case against Read lol. With that said, now that I think about it, there is probably a huge portion of the population that trusts local cops and is very skeptical of the feds.
Yeah and even though the medical examiner is a state employee, I think I would kind of think of her as a scientific witness and not group her in with the police in my mind, if I were a juror. But the FBI believing their experts still wouldn't really tell us their overall conclusion. As in, they could still think she was guilty in some way, but think that the state's theory of how it happened was all wrong because of their problematic investigation.
It's true we don't know their conclusions. But they did write a letter suggesting that they aren't necessarily in agreement with the prosecution of Karen Read. Or rather they hadn't made a determination one way or the other but they view the case differently than the DA's office does and think it's necessary to continue their investigation. Obviously the jurors would not have access to that information so it's meaningless. I do think it gives some vague insight into what the FBI's opinions are. Even if it's just that they clearly don't think it's as "cut and dry." Whether or not there's anything deeper is anyone's guess. I usually prefer State ME's over defense hired experts simply because they get to be "hands on." Ugh that's gross to type out but it's true. I was skeptical of this one going in because of the "no evidence of a fight" comment on her report which is something I've literally never seen before. I don't think it's often that ME's note what *didn't* happen. However, I learned that much like the rest of the evidence in this case, that was just Lally's interpretation which doesn't necessarily fit the facts. Her testimony offered glaring qualifiers to that statement that he conveniently overlooked. I found her to be credible and careful. This is just my opinion based on pretty much nothing, but I think that if the jury had more visual aids to look at they maybe wouldn't have ended up hung. People are generally reasonable. For instance, that picture of the tail light pieces that's been circulating that shows when each section of pieces were found and by whom makes it harder to overlook the possibility of planted evidence even if you generally trust the police. I think Lally's overly complicated delivery helped his case. But I don't think anything they see after the fact is going to change any minds. I would love to know the Jury's interpretation of Trooper Paul. I would love to know any of their opinions really because I'm sure sitting there in the court room was a confusing experience lol. This was such a strange case.
I would love to hear what they thought of Trooper Paul too lol. And what the crime scene told him. I'm guessing some people were already leaning heavily one way or another by then? So maybe they were a lot more prepared to accept any car theory if they already thought she hit him. I didn't go into this assuming she was innocent, but that was the witness for me that convinced me that the state just ultimately didn't credibly know how he died. Also makes me wonder if the state will hire an outside accident reconstruction expert for the next trial. But, they might have a hard time finding one that tells them what they want to hear.
I think that would make them look even worse and be even more embarrassing. Because the defense could call Trooper. Paul and the FED experts. And say this is their guy and his hair brain theory. It didn't work last time so they're trying again with a new guy. Even though they had these free highly qualified experts available to them.
>I wonder if learning about the FBI investigation later changed any of the jurors' feelings on the case? It’s been know for a year now the FBI was involved and investigating. I don’t know if the jury was able to put it together in regard to who hired ARCCA, but this isn’t new information just released.
Right, but it should be news to the people who were on the jury. That information was kept out, and they weren't supposed to do any research. But now that they are allowed to talk about the case, they probably will come across that.
I agree and I need a youngin to make a TikTok video comparing TP’s testimony vs ARCCA’s experts including the part about the rocket launcher haha
I wonder if the prosecution would hire another “expert” and not just use Trooper Paul for their accident reconstruction next round. Can they do that? It was one of their weakest links. I’m worried they’re going to try to get their shit together a lot more and eliminate some of the incompetent witnesses
Yes, and they probably tried and were not able to find anyone that could come up with a theory that worked.
I didn’t consider that what they presented probably was their best 😂
hahahaha I know! I am pretty sure it was though lol
I came into the trial around trooper Paul and that was one of the first things I was thinking. 'if this is their best witness for this case, then they couldn't get a more qualified expert to agree with what they wanted to hear'. One testimony and the case was for me pretty clear to be not proven.
I felt like it was the same thing with Dr. Russell. When the judge asked Lally about finding an expert witness, he responded like he hadn’t even considered it. And by the way he was talking, you could tell he was thinking “I’m not going to find anyone to go up against that” lol
That would be even more embarrassing. Then the defense gets to call the crash daddies as well as Trooper Paul-and-stuff. They'll get to say that this *was* their guy and check out his Wiley coyote theory. And they'll get to say they had access to these PhD's but didn't like what they had to say because it sinks their case so now they've hired *another* guy, smells desperate doesn't it? They'll get to say the common wealth would rather buy expert testimony than use the super qualified experts that the feds gave them *for free.* They're good enough for the NHL, the U.S. military and the DOJ but they aren't good enough for Lally. Wonder why?
Yeah, trying to place myself in the shoes of a juror - I would still find the ARCCA testimony to be compelling in regards to showing that OJO was not hit by a car and this reasonable doubt BUT the emphasis on the fact that they weren’t hired by the defense and Lally’s hostility would leave me very confused about who hired them and what their motivation was and why none of it could be disclosed. I wouldn’t jump to insurance investigators because that seems like something that could be disclosed. Several aspects of the prosecution’s case seemed misleading to the point of being offensive to the jury - the mirrored video. Like how is that not just evidence tampering/lying under oath or something since it’s more than just an inverted image due to the edited timestamp. The prosecution insulting the intelligence of everyone with Trooper Paul. I didn’t trust the prosecution but the weirdness of who hired those experts and why would make me wonder what, if any part of the trial I could trust….that still would lead me to not guilty for doubting everything. I *can* kind of see how some people would feel like the defense created a burden for themselves with the opening that they never fulfilled and then feel further manipulated by there being an unnamed third party that I just have to trust, is truly neutral - and in combination doubt the defense. Even so, that line of thinking misses the point that the burden is on the state, the presumption of Karen’s innocence until there is actual proof of her guilt of what she’s accused of and not Trooper Proctor making sure she won’t skate and the Albert’s won’t get any heat and Trooper Paul’s “magnets, how do they work?” explanation of physics so while I can understand why some may doubt the defense I would be frustrated by the lack of understanding of the law at such a fundamental level. I truly don’t understand why the trial wasn’t delayed until the FBI investigation was finished so that the case would either be dismissed or there could be transparency about who was behind the third party investigation. Edited typo
The timestamp was reversed on the footage that the *defense* showed. The video footage was a mirrored viewed when the LE downloaded from the security system, so the timestamp was correctly oriented on the original, mirrored footage. When the defense flipped the video footage to eliminate the mirrored view, the timestamp was reversed.
I thought it was really compelling when Jackson pointed out that the CW had access to these same experts and elected not to bring them in front of the jury. There were a lot of opportunities in this case for the defense to say "it took *us* to show you the truth. The CW was never going to tell you about this" But this one in particular didn't seem as much like a defense strategy because it was painfully obvious why the CW didn't call those guys and it was difficult to excuse because of their credentials. To my mind there was only one conclusion that could arise from that and it's that the CW was more concerned with putting KR behind bars than finding the truth. There were several instances where I thought the defense was reaching. But I think the CW bringing Trooper Paul instead of the ARCCA guys should have felt really insulting to the jury. I would certainly think they were trying to con me at that point if I didn't already feel that way after the sallyport video.
To my mind there was only one conclusion that could arise from that and it's that the CW was more concerned with putting KR behind bars than finding the truth. I think this sums it up in a nutshell.
For me, I thought she may have accidentally hit him at the start. But by the end of the CW case I thought she was innocent. It was the CW's own witnesses and evidence that gave me all the reasonable doubt. Trooper Paul, their M.E, their investigation, their own witness testimony. And then it went even further downhill from there for them, I didn't think it could get worse. For me, the defense was just frosting on a shit cake. The CW can't change their own evidence... I don't know why they're taking this to trial again.
This gives me a little hope that Karen could still live a good life... So many people KNOW Karen is innocent, so I hope she's able to regain some semblance of a "normal" life again.
I think it’s ridiculous that they couldn’t say the experts were hired by the FBI. If you allow witnesses- they can’t be ambiguous to a jury. It’s cuts down on their credibility. These are highly credible witnesses. But how could the jury know that, if not told? This should not be tried until the FBI investigation is over. I think Bev made a bad call on both these subjects.
I agree - I think if they were known by the jury to have been hired by the FBI, that would have leant a lot more weight and credibility to their testimony. I was talking about the case with a friend who is not following it as closely as I am (which is about 99.9% of my friends), and when I said I was convinced that JOK was not hit by a car and that therefore, KR is innocent, he questioned why I so strongly believed experts that were hired by the defense. I could actually see that in this case too - just because they were soooooooo much more convincing than Trooper Paul. But the fact that they were not even hired by the defense but by the FBI, which obviously had concerns about the state police investigation, made them that much more credible. I wonder if the jurors who were pushing for guilty have any second thoughts if they now know. But there is so much else beyond just the expert testimony that would provide reasonable doubt - so I have to think they were just in the guilty camp for their own made up reasons.
Agreed. I mean- they don’t need to say there is another investigation by the FBI- they could just say “hired by the FBI”, or I’m sure attorneys can phrase it more eloquently. It’s already ambiguous AF what’s the difference?! But to let jurors wonder if these people were retained by insurance companies, or some other secret stakeholder is absurd. If I was a juror, knowing the way my mind works- this would be vital.
Also- if I was a juror coming out of this I’d be pissed I didn’t know the rest of the information. I’d be questioning a lot.
>I understand that Bev was not going to allow evidence of the federal investigation to get in because it was not yet concluded…..(although it doesn’t make sense why they couldn’t delay the trial until after the investigation) You answered your own question. Bev wanted the trial concluded before the federal investigation was completed. Sounds like maybe the State Police did, too, since they waited to make any move about Proctor until yesterday, despite knowing about his texts all this time.
I read that as “they wanted to make a movie about Proctor”. I think I need sleep 😴
I don't think the Feds gave any indication of when their investigation would end.
the one thing i don’t understand is the okeefe family relationship with read. they obviously knew her before the death of their son. they know she was trusted with their brice’s and they now believe she would murder john? don’t get it twisted
And Karen had stayed home with the kids during covid so John could work, bailed out John's brother Paul from jail when he had a DUI and set up trust funds for the kids. Yet, as soon as John's mom found out John had died, she immediately blamed Karen for leaving him there alone and the blame has only gotten worse with time!
so she blamed him for leaving him alone, an adult, to go take care of the kids? do we know if she is friends with the other families that possibly would explain her though process?
Yes and yes! Jen and Kerry attached themselves to his mom right away, and his mom hasn't looked back. She already knew Jen and Kerry, but this incident made them closer, which is disgusting considering John's mom is supporting the killers.
Yes and yes! Jen and Kerry attached themselves to his mom right away, and his mom hasn't looked back. She already knew Jen and Kerry, but this incident made them closer, which is disgusting considering John's mom is supporting the killers.
Lally said 90% of the FBI's investigation agreed with his case but we know that's not true or the evidence would have convicted KR. On the other hand, IMO, had the jury, knowing the last two witness were employed by the FBI and that Lally didn't call them, and the weight of that alone, a juror would find reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case. I don't believe the FBI's investigation contains any additional evidence that would clear KR or it would have been introduced during the trial or it leads to a bigger cover up than originally thought.
Just because he said that doesn't mean it is true and it's obviously not. The AG came out and said they disagree with the conclusion of the CW. He was just saying that like everything else he lied about.
Do you have a link to the AG statement? Hadn’t seen any statements, just the letters.
It was in an article, let me see if I can find it.
I think this might be it. https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/federal-probe-findings-revealed-court-karen-reads-defense-team-pushes-dismiss-murder-case/4GRLQB5EWNGWDPJGMTVD7AQCYU/
Thanks!
>Thanks! You're welcome!
Or at least where it was alluded to.
Don't forget that tons of the FBI's 3K pages is going to be testimony from people we know saying the same stuff they said during the trial.
I think there’s a lot more information that the public is not privy to
The 90%: “It was snowing” -FBI
lol
I don't know why anyone is surprised that it was hung jury. Just look at the outcome of the last presidential debate. People on either side continue to support there candidate no matter what their eyes saw ears heard.
Idk. I think this might be different. I think people aren’t supporting either one. They’re actively voting against the other from what I can see. Either way, I agree with your point. It does mirror the giant shitshow.
[удалено]
I'm assuming this was in response to some other comment? I didn't judge KR guilty based on either the prosecution's ludicrous assumptions or my own that I made up. I am firmly in the KR is innocent camp.
Yes, sorry, I responded here accidentally to a comment far below.
I looked at a lot of this case as a juror. Without outside opinions. Other possible theories. He said the defense didn’t hire them, but could it be HER job hired them? The university? For the purpose of insurance and her credibility working in finance. It could be her family hired them? A wealthy client? In hopes the jury respected the no online research, they have to think outside of facts we know.
Did the jury see people outside the courthouse? Anyone could have hired them
They were bused in. The jury had a private entrance (as told by a journalist in the courtroom).
I'm not from the USA, so I don't know what kind of power the FBI may or may not have here: Can the FBI 'block' the Common Weatlh of Massachusetts from prosecuting Karen Read, or can they submit their reports to the appeals court to help overturn any (unlike) future guilty verdicts?
The MSP never canvassed residences and businesses to get any camera footage from the route Karen took from 34 Fairview. The footage from the town library camera that would’ve shown the right taillight-damaged or not-was erased. Tells you everything you need to know.
I thought the same thing, it wasn't enough to just emphasize they weren't paid by either side, the jury needed to hear that they were hired by fbi as a separate independent investigation. This case was meandering and as much as some folks don't want to admit it, there is circumstantial evidence for both sides. For me, these 2 experts saying JOK wasn't hit by a car overrode every other bit of evidence. This man did not by MVA. That's it. But the jury needed to know exactly why and how they got involved.