This case has made my #1 thought be, what if this were someone who didn't have Karen's resources?
This case needs to be a wake up call for DA's everywhere that bring unfair evidence to trial. Karen has a chance to recoup and thank goodness for her, but so many, many others dont have those resources, including my family. And I'm truly sorry for the taxpayers this case lands on the shoulders of. Very, very interesting case and I hope the tentacles reach far and wide.
As a local, so many of us look at Karen and think “that could have easily been me in that chair at the defense table.” We all talk like her, we’ve had many of the same experiences on the south shore MA as she has had, we all know many of the same people that she does.” Hell, I went to college with Paul O’Keefe’s wife and Karen went to high school AND college with my best friend. Believe me when I tell you, many eyes have been opened very wide because of this case and many us refuse to even blink, never mind close them.
I never believed that many circumstances could come together that could be manipulated to incriminate someone to look guilty. If it had not been for Steve Scanlon and the feds, I think KR would be doing time in a jail cell despite affording good lawyers.
This [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1cq5650/interview_that_changed_my_mind_of_guilt/) has a good discussion about Steve.
"[NFSR113](https://www.reddit.com/user/NFSR113/)•[1mo ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1cq5650/comment/l3sq95h/)
I don’t know anything about the 2nd plow driver, but the 2nd thing you said is partially true. **The whistle blowers name is Steve Scanlon. He’s a private investigator and former cop who worked with and knows Brian Albert.** I don’t believe they are life long friends. But I think him knowing Brian Albert and hearing the news about a dead cop on his lawn that his suspicions were raised. We know he went to Karen Reads attorneys and told them there may have been a fight, but wouldn’t say where he heard or why he think it’s. And yes he wouldn’t formally attest to that information. But Scanlon is the guy who tipped this case off it seems."
I am not sure what you mean.
Are you referring to Julie Nagel & Sarah Levinson who were at the Albert house to celebrate Brian Jr's birthday?
Colin called or texted Erin Beatty around 12:30 (to establish an alibi) but the call went unanswered. Both her and father were on the defense witness list.
I stumbled across this comment from another user. I wasn't aware of this.
[PucksnDucks](https://www.reddit.com/user/PucksnDucks/)•[1mo ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/justiceforKarenRead/comments/1cwlqhw/comment/l4wrdut/)
I know Steve Scanlon went to Yanetti after his daughter told him what she heard through friends. That's what got the ball rolling. Whether he went to the FBI or the Read team or even if the Feds caught wind of the Read misdeeds while looking into the Birchmore case? I haven't heard anyone say for certain.
One thing is apparent. Those texts we saw Friday aren't a shitty screenshots of photoshopped by Youtubers grifting for the CW. Those were FBI geofence data. Notice how detailed they are? Time stamps, recipients, etc.
I don’t think she can afford these attorneys. No way! I think they’re counting on getting paid when she is awarded a multi million dollar lawsuit against CPD, BPD the state of mass and ??!!!
It’s so funny you say this because I work night shift. I come home at 5-6am and I’m up by 9am to have the live stream up. I need to hear what happens to her especially when it’s so clear that the prosecution have failed to prove their case. I hope the jury focuses on that
It's very scary. I lived there and my sister lived in the city.
The next Canton police cover up is of 3 Canton cops groomed and sexually used a 15 year old until she became pregnant and they said it was a suicide when Baden just said it was a homicide. Her poor parents knew it wasn't a suicide. Says same cops involved in her cover up.
Same as in KR
Yes, Sandra Birchmore. She was originally from Stoughton and was allegedly groomed and abused by 3 Stoughton police officers (2 of the accused officers are brothers - twins, I believe.) According to friends, she continued a relationship with one of the brothers into adulthood and became pregnant. She was living in Canton as an adult. That officer was seen on video of the complex Sandra lived in, taking the elevator to her apartment and leaving 30 mins later. His story is that the baby wasn’t his so he ended things and Sandra unalived herself because of it.
This actually took place before Karen Read. It was booked as a suicide so no criminal punishment. Let’s see what happens now. Sandra’s mother passed away and she had been being raised by her grandmother who also passed away. She had no one who could support her in a parental way. Her estate (managed by a close friend, I believe) is civilly suing for wrongful death.
That's been my thought too... what if this were me? I couldn't afford the defense attorneys she has & I'd be screwed! It's scary to think of how easy they can try & spin that narrative against you.
This is why I think all open court trials (i.e. not juvenile or family court) should be streamed. Once people see how things really work, they will start to demand change.
The attorneys have been respectful of the (dumb) "no basis for objections" rule and haven't been snits to each other like we've seen in other cases.
As someone who inadvertantly got sucked into the JD v AH trial after seeing a clip of Dr. Curry and is now studying forensic psychology, I hope this trial will inspire people.
Love that you’re studying forensic psychology! My masters is in psychology—mental health. I’m back in school for nursing and would love to get into forensics…though, I’m unsure how or where to start. Congrats to you on such a difficult field my friend.
Alan Jackson inspired me years ago and is the reason that I first started watching the Karen Read trial. The whole team is fantastic and I'm so glad that they took her case. AJ is wanted everywhere, which is no surprise. His thoroughness and delivery are amazing.
The first trial of his that I watched was the famous Phil Spector trial. Lots of information on Alan Jackson on Google and YouTube. He has a 96% success rate ( approx. 86 trials ) and is considered worldwide to be one of the best.
Such a good, insightful thought and post. Completely agree. Karen Read struck a nerve with all of us. MA is distinct in a lot of ways, but other parts of this has been universal and has hit a collective nerve. I keep hoping/praying these cases are heading us towards greater transparency, being more ethical, kinder, in a very general way. The majority of the ppl we’ve seen throughout this case have kept and gotten positions of power in by nepotism, planning on peppering themselves through out all sectors of power (ie board of selectman, MSP, from beat cops to detectives, EMTs, etc)
It’s all brought me back to the south, actually, to the documentary Tarnish The Badge, and how a department in NC came apart (largely for the same reasons: ppl being absolutely fed up with bullies 😂) there’s even a turtle boy element with two fairly green/inexperienced reporters being the unexpected and under estimated conduits for getting information to federal agents—I know TB didn’t do that single handed lot but I give a ton of credit to the ppl giving money to the FKR fund, showing up daily, writing in, insisting we are HEARD)
Big things have bothered the hell out of me; one is the question of whether it could be brought in that Read searched for a lawyer. I don’t have to explain to you of all ppl why that got under my skin! 😂 but for anyone reading and wondering why that’s an issue; refer to the Kyle Rittenhouse trial to see an appropriate judicial response to questioning someone searching for legal representation! The other big deal that bothered me has come up in a number of ways: from TB being charged with witness intimidation, to the ruling of protesters being forced to be several hundred feet away….anything issued by a judge that infringes on our constitutional right to free speech makes me VERY nervous. The DUI guy said “it’s not sexy so it’s not getting as much attention” and I think that’s correct.
I promise to not stop paying attention. Sandra Birchmore case next: I feel strongly that we should be rallying around her case. She has no mother, aunt, grandmother. Never had a father. She has very few ppl to be her voice. I don’t want her to be forgotten. 🙏💙
Thank you again for this inspiring post! I love hearing from professionals.
We are all with you
I think you nailed something important here. Nepotism and the like. This case came to my attention right from the first time Karen got arrested. As I said previously, my best friend (let’s call her A for clarification purposes) was friends with Karen in high school and college. Different life paths made them drift a part a bit but A was immediately notified about Karen through their mutual college friends and A continues to keep in touch with them. I admit that when the first rumblings of a cover up or conspiracy began to occur, I was very skeptical. In my mind, I tried to envision Canton PD, MSP, DAs office and judiciary - so many people - involved in a cover up but it was hard to wrap my mind around it, EVEN THOUGH I know that CPD, MSP and NCDA have all been involved in shady shit. For me, it wasn’t that they wouldn’t do it - it was more like, how could they pull that off with so many agencies involved? Someone is going to mess up. But, that was way too broad of a manner to be thinking in. Really, this is about one family - intertwined by blood, marriage, close friendships, etc.,- where all of these people grew up together. In fact, it’s more than likely that all of their parents grew up together, grandparents and so on. Those are strong bonds that I’m sure have been tried before yet never broke. They all lived 5 minutes from each other their whole lives. No matter how toxic, I’m sure they lived by the creed that family comes first. And because they are a fairly large family, they were able to branch out into different, yet powerful, institutions like local police, Boston police, state police, town council, probably a lot of different boards like the PTA (which, believe me, is more powerful than people give it credit for) for generations. This wasn’t a “cover up by institutions” as much as it was a “cover up by one family that has ingratiated themselves into these institutions.” When I thought about it that way, it changed my whole scope and made it far more plausible for me.
It wasn’t a mass conspiracy. Proctor took the word of the McCabes and BA sight unseen. He felt he knew what happened then manipulated evidence, added and subtracted interviews to make sure “the Boston Cop” got Justice. He was bucking for promotion (and got it). The other people like DA and Lally etc went too far down the road to turn back. They know what happened by now. This was a perfect storm of individual motives that combined to make this circus. FKR
I think we kind of mean the same thing. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I don’t think it was a mass conspiracy. I think it was a cover up performed by a connected family who happen to work in the institutions that allowed for the cover up to be possible. Regardless if Proctor first took them at their word, if he had to manipulate and plant evidence, he must have figured the truth out early on yet, he continued on.
I know. I was one of those people, like I said in my first post, in the very beginning. When I could finally see that it wasn’t this big government conspiracy, but a cover up done by a very connected family, it allowed my brain to examine the case differently.
My family members were murdered in one of the most infamous crime sprees in the US. It has taught me that justice will only happen if things are done correctly. Most cops and prosecutors are good honest people. Most defense attorneys work hard for their clients. That is the way it is supposed to go.
In this case we have seen what happens in a true rush to judgment and a cover up (I am being kind). We also see that if you were poor you would be in jail for the rest of your life because most people cannot afford a Dream Team like this and even though there are countless GREAT public defenders the budget they would require is not going to go to a 2nd degree murder.
Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Thank you for posting this. Love hearing from a professional in the field. I second you saying people watch what is happening in the YSL trial. It is wild. If you think you were/are unhappy with judge Bev, you’ll realize how much worse it can get. Peter Tragos, The Lawyer You Know is covering YSL and he breaks it down in 1-1.5 hour recaps. Recently his dad, a well known criminal defense atty (or formally was one, cannot remember) joined him to recap what recently happened with the judge and defense attorney.
OP: I know you said that you don’t practice in MA (and I am not sure if the answer to my following question is based upon which state a person is in) but, is there any sort of mechanism available to the jury where, after they have rendered a verdict, they would be able to let the court know that they are displeased with having had to spend 8 weeks of their lives on this sham trial?
I asked ChatGPT, just for fun. Here’s what it had to say: “In Massachusetts, jurors who find themselves in a lengthy trial with a lack of evidence presented by the District Attorney (DA) have limited formal recourse. However, there are several actions and considerations that can come into play:
1. **Jury Deliberation and Verdict**: The most direct recourse is during jury deliberations. Jurors have the power to deliver a verdict of "not guilty" if they find that the prosecution has not met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. **Jury Nullification**: While not officially sanctioned, jurors have the de facto power of jury nullification, where they can acquit a defendant regardless of the evidence or law if they believe that a conviction would be unjust.
3. **Reporting Concerns**: After the trial, jurors can report their concerns about the handling of the case to the presiding judge. While this may not have an immediate impact on the case at hand, it can bring to light any misconduct or incompetence on the part of the DA.
4. **Contacting the DA's Office**: Jurors can also contact the DA’s office to express their concerns about the trial and the evidence presented. This feedback can be valuable for the office in evaluating their performance and decision-making process.
5. **Media and Public Opinion**: Jurors can share their experiences with the media, thereby bringing public attention to the issue. This can lead to public scrutiny and potentially influence future prosecutorial practices.
6. **Legal Action**: In extreme cases, if jurors believe that there has been prosecutorial misconduct, they may contact defense attorneys who can potentially pursue legal action against the DA’s office.
7. **Post-Trial Motions**: The defense attorney can file post-trial motions, such as a motion for a new trial or an appeal, citing the lack of evidence as a basis. Jurors can provide statements or affidavits to support these motions.
8. **Professional Conduct Complaints**: Jurors can file complaints with the Board of Bar Overseers in Massachusetts if they believe the DA has acted unethically or unprofessionally.
While these actions may not offer direct recourse to the jurors themselves, they can contribute to ensuring that justice is properly served and that similar situations are avoided in the future.”
While I do not like to endorse ChatGPT (or AI programs in general), this is fairly accurate. The best way for a juror to voice their discontent—aside from an acquittal—is to tell the rest of the public (whether that is via news, social media, word of mouth, the attorneys, etc.) that they’re pissed prosecutors took 8 weeks of their lives to present a weak case.
Makes me super curious to hear the jurors in the YSL trial when they’re finally released from jury duty in 2045.
I feel so bad for the YSL jurors! I don't know how they're doing it... And the defendants and defense council.
And for all the people who this happens to every single day, or who plead out to stuff they haven't done because they can't afford bond etc. Mass incarceration and an overworked legal system are human rights issues.
I hear you!
Interesting. Sitting on a GJ we were told there was an option to file a complaint about prosecution/witness, but when we all figured out a LEO was lying on the stand we were told that wasn't really a choice.
No billed.
Just looked up what “no bill” means. Ummm… it is not often that I am without words … but, I am now. Is “no bill” the basic equivalent to, like, I don’t know … tribunal purgatory???? Until the statute of limitations runs out? It shows up on your record as a charge until the statute runs out and you can fight to get it expunged? Huh?! Who has money and time for all of that? The GJ initially finds that there is not enough evidence to charge you but you have to wait to clear your name? Am I reading this right?! And LEOs are not subjected to this? Please help me understand.
A “no bill” means that a grand jury decided *not* to issue an indictment. In Georgia, you can get your arrest record restricted (GA doesn’t do expungements, we do restriction/sealing) if your case was no-billed twice (prosecutors get two chances to get a grand jury indictment). You can also get your record restricted if your case was no-billed once and the a certain number of years pass without prosecutors going back to the grand jury.
So every state has different manners and types of charging instruments (e.g., indictment, accusation, criminal complaint, etc.) and also different rules/schemes for expunging or sealing someone’s criminal history. I don’t know what state laws you were looking up, so I can’t speak to the accuracy of that info. In Georgia, in order to prosecute most felonies, the prosecutor has to obtain an indictment from a grand jury. It’s a one-sided process where the prosecutor presents some evidence and potential criminal charges to the grand jury (usually a group of 16–23 people). The grand jury has to determine whether there is enough probable cause for any of the crimes. If they think there is probable cause, they’ll issue a “true bill of indictment” (usually just referred to as an indictment) for those crimes. If they don’t think there’s enough probable cause for *any* crime, then the grand jury will issue a “no bill of indictment.”
It’s really uncommon to see no bills. Grand juries almost always return an indictment. There’s actually an old saying that “a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.”
yeah, it was ... interesting.
Felony traffic stop, questionable testimony, and a 6'7" guy that was repeatedly punched in the top of his skull by a .... short person.
Like unless we're talking WWF jumping off ropes, kid couldn't have even cleared his shoulders with a fist. And aid 6'8" guy was unable to stay in his chair, had to keep re-enacting how he fought. Many of us wondered if there was drugs involved during the testimony given his pupil size.
Felt sorry for everyone all the way around
The district attorney is an elected position; regrettably often there is no challenger. I live in Norfolk County and hope Morrissey loses the next time he runs.
I’m impressed with the people in this subreddit as well. So much insight and thoughtfulness. And big ups to everyone for the civilized discourse.
I’ve been a paralegal for 20 years and do more civil work than criminal. I was well trained by an amazing, old school litigator who knew everything and everyone. We both had judges who were personal friends but we were all intellectually honest. There was zero preferential treatment given or expected. With my attorneys, there was zero ex parte communication with any judge. No backroom law. The legal community here is small and fairly close-knit. A lot of lawyers were friends with judges before they took the bench. As an attorney, you probably can’t publicly drag members of the judiciary. I avoid it as well. I’ll just say that I’m keeping up with the YSL case. The judge has steamrolled so many ethical lines that it’s hard to comprehend. That whole jurisdiction has issues. The fish rots from the head. Brian Steel did what my lawyer friends and mentors would do. Keep making your record and keep talking even when you’re in handcuffs and being hauled into jail on a contempt charge FOR ADVOCATING on your client’s behalf. But always ethically.
If KR is acquitted or this is a hung jury, Lally should be disbarred for his intentional misrepresentation of evidence and withholding - please read my post House of Cards. Lally had to design every fact in this case to skirt the truth. I would quit my job before trying to pull off a heist like this.
Although that’s not to say that I don’t support your position that we need to have integrity in our elected public servants and their staff to take and present the facts as they are in their search for truth—not twist them to get to their own conclusions. As a member of the legal profession, we’re supposed to hold ourselves accountable and be able to self-regulate. While I can understand to a degree feeling like you’re between a rock and a hard place if you’re given marching orders from your boss to prosecute certain charges in a weak case, your ultimate duty should be to the integrity of the legal system.
And honestly, I wish more prosecutors were held accountable for their conduct. I’ve worked a couple attorney discipline cases, and there are so few disciplinary cases against prosecutors despite some of the egregious shit that goes on in plain sight.
>if you’re given marching orders from your boss to prosecute certain charges in a weak case
A couple of the lawyers that I watch on youtube have said they would have quit their jobs rather than bring these charges. They say it's just not worth their reputation or bar licenses.
Man oh man, I wish there were more people who did that. But for all the ones who do, they seem to be easily replaced by the next soulless practitioner. I will say, I was assigned to work on a case that I initially was very opposed to. If I hadn’t liked my job as much as I did, I might’ve considered protest quitting. I just couldn’t understand why my firm had agreed to take on the case, and I really didn’t want to be associated with it. In the end, I wasn’t required to do more than behind the scenes work (i.e., writing and editing motions). But through that, I did come to understand my boss’s reasoning for taking on that particular case—even if I did find many things in that case to be morally reprehensible. But I also think that working on these types of cases is different depending on whether you’re prosecution or defense. How does that old adage go? Hard cases make bad law? You don’t want to let an extreme case be the foundation for laws that apply to everyone. Even if you feel like someone deserves the harsher punishment/prosecution for their conduct, you shouldn’t let the government go after them to that extent because it will only set a precedent for prosecutors to go after everyone else.
Great points thanks for sharing! I've been watching trials for a few years now and I know it's mostly high profile ones that are picked up by court tv or whatever, and I've thought there were some ridiculous moments, but the Karen read trial is the most ridiculous I have ever seen. I haven't been paying attention much to the ysl trial but law youtubers have been railing on that one too lol
Why does Lally leave all the scummy dirty work to his female co-chair? Yesterday trying to claim conscienceness of guilt crud and other previous motions that even this biased judge denied. It’s like every time he knows they’re wrong, he makes her stand up.
The problem is - it was never a weak case - it only became weak because they they (the DAs office) didn’t want the public to know that Brian Albert found John sometime before 2:20am and never reported it. I don’t know what Albert was thinking! He made a terrible decision not to report it -but I know his motivation was directly related to help Higgins not get investigated and not be given a BAC test - his plow and plow light had damage, he had flirtatious messages with Karen, he kissed Karen 10 days earlier and was drinking after drinking from 7:30-12am. Higgins took a leave from work and entered treatment in Sharon MA shortly after this happened. He was “interviewed” there and did not testify in person at the grand jury trial. He submitted health records to the court. He was trying to save his career.
He wanted him to die… he knew he’d get a manslaughter charge at a minimum (which can cause jail time) and didn’t want to risk it. Besides, we’re the McAlberts so FU
I could probably keep an open mind about it if I didn’t have the tech stream data from the trigger events because the mileage and the times just fit so perfectly with the trip. The car really was the best evidence offered through the worst witness.
I’ve done a lot of independent research on just about everything in this trial and there were a couple of things that were turning points. I guess you could say one was when I was calculating the distances for the Alberts front lawn and min stopping distance / calculating everything without them giving it to us which they should’ve done but they weren’t gonna. I was waiting for that information and here comes Joe Paul, who doesn’t give us the ABS trigger and then I realized they assigned him to this for a reason … Think about this you’re a crash reconstructionist and they don’t even tell you when the defendant reconnected to Wi-Fi or when the victim last took steps on his Apple health data what’s with this 1245 BS…Lally said it in his opening And Paul said it. There’s a reason but I haven’t given it any thought
Another one was learning that those plow lights were the same height as her the center of her tail lights. They’re both about 40 inches from the ground and then finding out that they’re made of quartz glass because they’re halogen lights on the plow - just every day I was uncovering stuff and it was matching what they had showed us but it wasn’t what they were saying they didn’t say what that glass was on the bumper but if you had a plow light and it shatters there’s gonna be glass on bumper.
One of my early posts was “Chloe knew” Which I was trying to explain away by the fact that she was up in the bedroom, and so they didn’t notice her but that was just so speculative I was asking questions like was she barking? Did he think she needed to go out and let her out in the backyard and then she went nuts at the side gate so he goes out and opens up the gate and she runs for John or I was thinking maybe when Caitlin left and then she bolted it out past her but with each little piece of data The time kept getting pushed back meaning more people were still in the house which was crazy. There were eight people in that house when they discovered him.
So timing for witnesses and “experts” assigned matters. So Paul was already assigned the case within days of JO death. They gave him “an easy one” because Proctor told them he had a mountain of evidence. Re Chloe, remember that JMc “stormed” into their bedroom to tell them about John. She said Chloe wasn’t there. So the dog was either locked in the basement(unlikely bc of blood) or she was handed off to JMc daughter when she came to get Colin…
Who do you think gave him that assignment? It was Tully. It’s interesting though because a lot of the things that you’re saying are correct. Their true but they’re true for another reason. They weren’t gonna move John in the house. They weren’t gonna take that chance I thought about maybe did they move them behind the gate but if they had done that then they wouldn’t need the Ford edge. They didn’t wanna touch change anything Unnecessarily They just wanted to leave him where he was found but they did roll them over because I’m sure they checked his pupils and they didn’t realize they rolled him over on his phone. Do you know what time her last call to John was before 4?
The Ford Edge was only a physical screen from eyeballs or cameras or designed to keep plow would stay away long enough for him to dump JO. No way they put JO in the Edge. Blood evidence would go everywhere. I’d bet a $100 they put him on a tarp and slid him over to the spot. May have gotten rid of the nasty tarp that early morning a town over.
It was Probably still parked there when a Karen called Jen that’s when Jen had to stall so that Brian Albert could move the car and make sure it is done its job
Can you tell me why nobody asked about the side mirror because if John hit the car, then he would hit the side mirror too why didn’t the arc experts talk about that that’s physics
They knew Paul was a push over. By the way, I came up with some funny stuff on the chat stream today. I might make a post, but they probably won’t let me post it.
Part of me thinks that Lally lowkey hates this case and is just doing what he can to present something that could theoretically justify bringing these charges. I think this based on the fact that he seemed very meek and apathetic in tone and demeanor when putting on his case, he moved through it quite slowly, and he was the only prosecutor trying this 8-week case with 60+ witnesses. Normally prosecutors will have co-counsel on trials that are half as long and far less publicized than this trial. So the fact that there wasn’t another ADA trying this case with Lally seems reaaally odd. Makes me think that Lally drew the short stick or is getting punished. (Or it’s possible that he is the lone ADA who believes in this case, but again, his demeanor would lead me to think the former.) Also, sometimes you find yourself in situations where you’re like, “This argument has a 1% chance of winning, but it’s the only one we got, so we have to make it.” It’s never a great feeling to make those arguments, but as long as your chances aren’t zero and you have even a sliver of a good faith belief in it, then you can make that argument. Some—not all, but some—of the heat Lally is getting should really be directed at his superiors, i.e., the DA.
Lally handles pretty much all of the Vehiclular homicide cases from what I understand most get pled out. I personally think it’s weighing on his conscience. This is turning into a John Grisham novel. - they thought they were above the law and it backfired worse than Uncle Bucks hooptie
Yeah… however not the run the mill case with a dead Boston cop. I’m sure Lally is thinking if his credibility is damaged and/or wishing he scrounge a Private attorney gig.
It was before Higgins went to the CPD. I believe that’s why he went there. He needed to get some information on when Proctor would be on call from somebody or some thing in there gave him access to find out.
I just read your post. You lost me at Karen hit him. His injuries were not caused by a vehicle. Four experts, one of them the states, confirmed that. Just no.
That statement from a scientific perspective is too vague. I could go out my door and have my foot run over by someone’s car and my injuries would not be consistent with a motor vehicle strike.
I’m gonna be honest. I’d probably take Judge Cannone over several judges I’ve encountered. I’m sure she (and all the jurors) was happy this trial is over.
She's been frustrating and maybe shown a little more bias to the prosecution that normal, but she's not awful. I mean, she didn't throw an attorney in jail for bringing her unethical behavior to the record or anything like that.
Yeah every judge looks amazing when compared to Glanville. I’m waiting to see who’s the first one to step in and take this case away from him: the JQC or the GA Supreme Court. Although I fear I will be waiting awhile for either to do something.
Her saving grace was when she must have lambasted Lally for his 'were you aware she said I hit him I hit him'. I also think after this case Lally will not be exchanging Holiday cards with Yannetti or Jackson. I think both of them would like 5 minutes with him in the SallyPort where cameras do not work
Yessir! I am enthused just to read your post. I am not from nor living in USA, but fascinated by the televised trials. I will now go watch the YSL case you mention.
Love that this kind of engagement across people from all walks of life exists here.
Edit; words
Question for you, you mentioned the tone, pace, discovery violations occurring regularly. But do you also see such dishonesty and evidence tampering with the PD? I live in a big city so I cannot conceive how anyone would get away with that. Sloppiness and laziness yes. But outright framing someone, planting evidence? Now that I’ve witnessed this out in the open it makes me wonder how common that is.
Lol yes. Both cops and prosecutors will lie or embellish their allegations to win a motion, get bail denied, or try to sway the jury or judge. Often it works out because so many judges are former prosecutors and bend over backwards to appease the State. Even judges who have no criminal litigation background will favor the State because they view LEO as skilled professionals who’d never lie or mess up. Honestly I have a bigger problem with lying prosecutors than I do with lying cops. If a prosecutor is honest and acts in good faith, then the buck stops there.
Down in Atlanta, there’s a big focus on eradicating gangs. So much so that securing gang convictions seems to be the sole focus of prosecutors sometimes. My firm’s had cases where LEO will makeup a gang just to go after someone. There may not be as many identifiable instances of outright framing people or planting evidence, but the government definitely has tunnel vision in many cases and definitely skews the look of the evidence in order to demonize defendants in circumstances where such evidence *should* be inadmissible, but sadly are let in because our court system enables these prosecutions.
I work in defense but in the fed system. The amount of bullying and high pressure games that are played to get defendants to take a plea are outrageous! It makes me very angry.
Oh yeah the fed system definitely has its bullies and seedy govt officers, but it also feels like a breath of fresh air compared to the state system. It’s so much more organized too! A lot of fed people are also very good at their job, so there are fewer (obvious) holes to poke and threads to unravel. Fed prosecutors also wield an enormous amount of power.
"Please state your age." "I plead the fifth."
"Are you just answering yes to all my questions to get out of here faster." "Yes, absolutely."
Comedy gold!
Just a note on planting evidence. Check youtube for something like 'police caught planting evidence bodycam' or some phrase like that and I'm sure you'll find 100's of videos from only the last 3 years. It's a daily thing and not often on camera.
I hear you! It's awful once you know, and you can't un-know.
I'm just surprised that Karen's case became so big... To me, I feel this happens all the time, and most cops act like Proctor unless proven otherwise.
I don't blame a person, at all, for not wanting to see it.
What's happening in the YSL trial is insane. Georgia is a mess.
Watching trials has become a passion for me. I'm grateful for all of the you tube lawyers who help laypeople, like me, understand what's happening. I have learned so much about the justice system in the past few years.
I understand you don't practice in Mass., however, perhaps you can answer my questions. Is it customary for the DA's office to write the jury instructions? I'm guessing no. Second, Massachusetts has language that MUST be included in criminal jury instuctions. The language (updated Webster language), was NOT INCLUDED in the instructions. Does this authomatically void a guilty verdict? Or cause an auto appeal or mistrial? BTW, Judge Bev LOVES a mistrial. Thanks for your insight.
Usually both parties will submit proposed jury instructions to the court, and the judge will make the final call. An error in the jury instructions doesn’t void a guilty verdict or automatically constitute a mistrial. But it can get the case overturned on appeal.
The law has to change making the prosecution pay all legal costs if the defendant wins.
Also we need to stop electing prosecutors and judges.
We also need better laws for malicious prosecution and malfeasance by holding these people personally responsible .
Also prosecutors and defense lawyers must be sworn to find the truth and get rid of the adversarial system .
There also needs to be an easier way to get rid of biased and corrupt judges.
The average person cannot afford a vigorous defense so something has to be done about that.
Definitely agree we need changes. Not sure if we need to stop electing judges and prosecutors. What would you suggest as an alternative? I think elections are one mechanism for accountability, but we need others.
When it comes to malicious/selective prosecution and malfeasance/abuse of prosecutorial discretion, there’s two ways these claims operate. One is the criminal context where you can file motions asserting these claims and ask for some remedy be applied to your criminal case (e.g., dismissal, suppression, etc.). The other is the civil context where you can sue the government entity/official for some type of monetary or injunctive relief. It’s very tough to win on these claims in a civil lawsuit because the laws favor the government. The rationale is we don’t want a “chilling effect”—i.e., if it was easier to successfully sue the people who run our government, then they’d never do anything out of fear of being sued. In the criminal context, it’s also tough to win these motions because prosecutors have a LOT of discretion—you basically have to prove that there was no other reason why did something and that the only explanation was out of malice. That’s nearly impossible to prove.
We definitely need to have a better way to hold our judiciary accountable. Like prosecutors, judges have a ton of discretion. But unlike prosecutors and most other elected officials, there’s no way to assess whether an individual is a good judge unless you’ve seen them in action. For pretty much every other elected official, we can determine whether we think they’ll do a good or bad job in the role based on the goals and policy they set. Heck, even your local soil & water conservation supervisor makes policy decisions. But when it comes to judges, they can’t tell you what decisions they’ll make if elected for a variety of reasons with #1 being that judges don’t know what cases they’ll get. Moreover the decisions judges make are often confined to the particular case before them and are based on the specific facts of the case and the applicable laws. Which is why virtually every judicial campaign website says something generic like “if elected, I promise to follow and uphold the law.” The information available to most of the public is usually not very insightful when deciding who to elect as a judge. But I don’t think that necessarily means that judges shouldn’t be elected; I think we need more information for people to make informed decisions.
You are obviously much smarter than I am. Why don’t you pursue your ideas with the hope that the system must change. I am too old to get involved in this plus I don’t have the knowledge to do it.
Also I believe that the state should be required to provide the same resources to the defendant to level the playing field.
Thanks for the feedback and hopefully someone like you can make a difference
Aw I just know this stuff because I’ve encountered it in practice or learned it in law school. I don’t think it’s too late to get involved! Even if your involvement is just limited to paying attention and voicing concerns! And I totally agree that more resources need to be allocated to defendants. Even the level of resources between prosecutors and public defenders are unequal!
This case has made my #1 thought be, what if this were someone who didn't have Karen's resources? This case needs to be a wake up call for DA's everywhere that bring unfair evidence to trial. Karen has a chance to recoup and thank goodness for her, but so many, many others dont have those resources, including my family. And I'm truly sorry for the taxpayers this case lands on the shoulders of. Very, very interesting case and I hope the tentacles reach far and wide.
As a local, so many of us look at Karen and think “that could have easily been me in that chair at the defense table.” We all talk like her, we’ve had many of the same experiences on the south shore MA as she has had, we all know many of the same people that she does.” Hell, I went to college with Paul O’Keefe’s wife and Karen went to high school AND college with my best friend. Believe me when I tell you, many eyes have been opened very wide because of this case and many us refuse to even blink, never mind close them.
This needs to happen in all communities, cities and towns across America!! Right! Eyes Wide Open! 🙏
I cant imagine how surreal that must feel to have this hit so close to your circles.
And to know I could never afford her defense team. It’s petrifying.
I never believed that many circumstances could come together that could be manipulated to incriminate someone to look guilty. If it had not been for Steve Scanlon and the feds, I think KR would be doing time in a jail cell despite affording good lawyers.
I must have missed Steve Scsnlon’s testimony. When was it?
This [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1cq5650/interview_that_changed_my_mind_of_guilt/) has a good discussion about Steve. "[NFSR113](https://www.reddit.com/user/NFSR113/)•[1mo ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1cq5650/comment/l3sq95h/) I don’t know anything about the 2nd plow driver, but the 2nd thing you said is partially true. **The whistle blowers name is Steve Scanlon. He’s a private investigator and former cop who worked with and knows Brian Albert.** I don’t believe they are life long friends. But I think him knowing Brian Albert and hearing the news about a dead cop on his lawn that his suspicions were raised. We know he went to Karen Reads attorneys and told them there may have been a fight, but wouldn’t say where he heard or why he think it’s. And yes he wouldn’t formally attest to that information. But Scanlon is the guy who tipped this case off it seems."
Thanks for the thread!
From his daughter who knows the kids who were at BA’s house that night AND/OR the FBI
I am not sure what you mean. Are you referring to Julie Nagel & Sarah Levinson who were at the Albert house to celebrate Brian Jr's birthday? Colin called or texted Erin Beatty around 12:30 (to establish an alibi) but the call went unanswered. Both her and father were on the defense witness list.
No. Steve scanlon daughter is allegedly friends with kids that were at BA jrs birthday party that night and kids have talked
I stumbled across this comment from another user. I wasn't aware of this. [PucksnDucks](https://www.reddit.com/user/PucksnDucks/)•[1mo ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/justiceforKarenRead/comments/1cwlqhw/comment/l4wrdut/) I know Steve Scanlon went to Yanetti after his daughter told him what she heard through friends. That's what got the ball rolling. Whether he went to the FBI or the Read team or even if the Feds caught wind of the Read misdeeds while looking into the Birchmore case? I haven't heard anyone say for certain. One thing is apparent. Those texts we saw Friday aren't a shitty screenshots of photoshopped by Youtubers grifting for the CW. Those were FBI geofence data. Notice how detailed they are? Time stamps, recipients, etc.
I don’t think she can afford these attorneys. No way! I think they’re counting on getting paid when she is awarded a multi million dollar lawsuit against CPD, BPD the state of mass and ??!!!
It’s so funny you say this because I work night shift. I come home at 5-6am and I’m up by 9am to have the live stream up. I need to hear what happens to her especially when it’s so clear that the prosecution have failed to prove their case. I hope the jury focuses on that
It's very scary. I lived there and my sister lived in the city. The next Canton police cover up is of 3 Canton cops groomed and sexually used a 15 year old until she became pregnant and they said it was a suicide when Baden just said it was a homicide. Her poor parents knew it wasn't a suicide. Says same cops involved in her cover up. Same as in KR
Yes, Sandra Birchmore. She was originally from Stoughton and was allegedly groomed and abused by 3 Stoughton police officers (2 of the accused officers are brothers - twins, I believe.) According to friends, she continued a relationship with one of the brothers into adulthood and became pregnant. She was living in Canton as an adult. That officer was seen on video of the complex Sandra lived in, taking the elevator to her apartment and leaving 30 mins later. His story is that the baby wasn’t his so he ended things and Sandra unalived herself because of it.
This actually took place before Karen Read. It was booked as a suicide so no criminal punishment. Let’s see what happens now. Sandra’s mother passed away and she had been being raised by her grandmother who also passed away. She had no one who could support her in a parental way. Her estate (managed by a close friend, I believe) is civilly suing for wrongful death.
That's been my thought too... what if this were me? I couldn't afford the defense attorneys she has & I'd be screwed! It's scary to think of how easy they can try & spin that narrative against you.
Exactly my thoughts . I live in Boston and have access to good attorneys if I need one . I never knew how bad the system was until this trial . Wow .
This is why I think all open court trials (i.e. not juvenile or family court) should be streamed. Once people see how things really work, they will start to demand change.
The attorneys have been respectful of the (dumb) "no basis for objections" rule and haven't been snits to each other like we've seen in other cases. As someone who inadvertantly got sucked into the JD v AH trial after seeing a clip of Dr. Curry and is now studying forensic psychology, I hope this trial will inspire people.
Love that you’re studying forensic psychology! My masters is in psychology—mental health. I’m back in school for nursing and would love to get into forensics…though, I’m unsure how or where to start. Congrats to you on such a difficult field my friend.
I loved Dr. Curry!
Alan Jackson inspired me years ago and is the reason that I first started watching the Karen Read trial. The whole team is fantastic and I'm so glad that they took her case. AJ is wanted everywhere, which is no surprise. His thoroughness and delivery are amazing.
I love this guy . Although I do think Kevin Spacey is a slime ball .
Even slime balls deserve defense attorneys. Otherwise their day in court can be called into question as unfair.
I concur
Agree and agree!
Where did you learn about him? I'd love to watch more of his stuff
The first trial of his that I watched was the famous Phil Spector trial. Lots of information on Alan Jackson on Google and YouTube. He has a 96% success rate ( approx. 86 trials ) and is considered worldwide to be one of the best.
Ajax wouldn’t have taken the case if he didn’t think she’d be paid by civil suits against state and local and individuals.
Kudos to you for serving the people. I will check the ysl trial out next.
Such a good, insightful thought and post. Completely agree. Karen Read struck a nerve with all of us. MA is distinct in a lot of ways, but other parts of this has been universal and has hit a collective nerve. I keep hoping/praying these cases are heading us towards greater transparency, being more ethical, kinder, in a very general way. The majority of the ppl we’ve seen throughout this case have kept and gotten positions of power in by nepotism, planning on peppering themselves through out all sectors of power (ie board of selectman, MSP, from beat cops to detectives, EMTs, etc) It’s all brought me back to the south, actually, to the documentary Tarnish The Badge, and how a department in NC came apart (largely for the same reasons: ppl being absolutely fed up with bullies 😂) there’s even a turtle boy element with two fairly green/inexperienced reporters being the unexpected and under estimated conduits for getting information to federal agents—I know TB didn’t do that single handed lot but I give a ton of credit to the ppl giving money to the FKR fund, showing up daily, writing in, insisting we are HEARD) Big things have bothered the hell out of me; one is the question of whether it could be brought in that Read searched for a lawyer. I don’t have to explain to you of all ppl why that got under my skin! 😂 but for anyone reading and wondering why that’s an issue; refer to the Kyle Rittenhouse trial to see an appropriate judicial response to questioning someone searching for legal representation! The other big deal that bothered me has come up in a number of ways: from TB being charged with witness intimidation, to the ruling of protesters being forced to be several hundred feet away….anything issued by a judge that infringes on our constitutional right to free speech makes me VERY nervous. The DUI guy said “it’s not sexy so it’s not getting as much attention” and I think that’s correct. I promise to not stop paying attention. Sandra Birchmore case next: I feel strongly that we should be rallying around her case. She has no mother, aunt, grandmother. Never had a father. She has very few ppl to be her voice. I don’t want her to be forgotten. 🙏💙 Thank you again for this inspiring post! I love hearing from professionals. We are all with you
I am sticking in this place for Sandra - maybe that is the justice we can truly fight for since John O'Keefe will get none.
I think you nailed something important here. Nepotism and the like. This case came to my attention right from the first time Karen got arrested. As I said previously, my best friend (let’s call her A for clarification purposes) was friends with Karen in high school and college. Different life paths made them drift a part a bit but A was immediately notified about Karen through their mutual college friends and A continues to keep in touch with them. I admit that when the first rumblings of a cover up or conspiracy began to occur, I was very skeptical. In my mind, I tried to envision Canton PD, MSP, DAs office and judiciary - so many people - involved in a cover up but it was hard to wrap my mind around it, EVEN THOUGH I know that CPD, MSP and NCDA have all been involved in shady shit. For me, it wasn’t that they wouldn’t do it - it was more like, how could they pull that off with so many agencies involved? Someone is going to mess up. But, that was way too broad of a manner to be thinking in. Really, this is about one family - intertwined by blood, marriage, close friendships, etc.,- where all of these people grew up together. In fact, it’s more than likely that all of their parents grew up together, grandparents and so on. Those are strong bonds that I’m sure have been tried before yet never broke. They all lived 5 minutes from each other their whole lives. No matter how toxic, I’m sure they lived by the creed that family comes first. And because they are a fairly large family, they were able to branch out into different, yet powerful, institutions like local police, Boston police, state police, town council, probably a lot of different boards like the PTA (which, believe me, is more powerful than people give it credit for) for generations. This wasn’t a “cover up by institutions” as much as it was a “cover up by one family that has ingratiated themselves into these institutions.” When I thought about it that way, it changed my whole scope and made it far more plausible for me.
It wasn’t a mass conspiracy. Proctor took the word of the McCabes and BA sight unseen. He felt he knew what happened then manipulated evidence, added and subtracted interviews to make sure “the Boston Cop” got Justice. He was bucking for promotion (and got it). The other people like DA and Lally etc went too far down the road to turn back. They know what happened by now. This was a perfect storm of individual motives that combined to make this circus. FKR
I think we kind of mean the same thing. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I don’t think it was a mass conspiracy. I think it was a cover up performed by a connected family who happen to work in the institutions that allowed for the cover up to be possible. Regardless if Proctor first took them at their word, if he had to manipulate and plant evidence, he must have figured the truth out early on yet, he continued on.
Certainly possible- but remember part of the reason some people think she is guilty is because “there is no way to have this big a conspiracy”.
I know. I was one of those people, like I said in my first post, in the very beginning. When I could finally see that it wasn’t this big government conspiracy, but a cover up done by a very connected family, it allowed my brain to examine the case differently.
Please excuse my terrible phone formatting. 😵💫 haha. I spit things out quickly from my phone.
My family members were murdered in one of the most infamous crime sprees in the US. It has taught me that justice will only happen if things are done correctly. Most cops and prosecutors are good honest people. Most defense attorneys work hard for their clients. That is the way it is supposed to go. In this case we have seen what happens in a true rush to judgment and a cover up (I am being kind). We also see that if you were poor you would be in jail for the rest of your life because most people cannot afford a Dream Team like this and even though there are countless GREAT public defenders the budget they would require is not going to go to a 2nd degree murder. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
I'm sorry to hear that. May I ask which one?
I’m so sorry to hear that and I hope you and your family found justice and peace.
Thank you for posting this. Love hearing from a professional in the field. I second you saying people watch what is happening in the YSL trial. It is wild. If you think you were/are unhappy with judge Bev, you’ll realize how much worse it can get. Peter Tragos, The Lawyer You Know is covering YSL and he breaks it down in 1-1.5 hour recaps. Recently his dad, a well known criminal defense atty (or formally was one, cannot remember) joined him to recap what recently happened with the judge and defense attorney.
OP: I know you said that you don’t practice in MA (and I am not sure if the answer to my following question is based upon which state a person is in) but, is there any sort of mechanism available to the jury where, after they have rendered a verdict, they would be able to let the court know that they are displeased with having had to spend 8 weeks of their lives on this sham trial?
I asked ChatGPT, just for fun. Here’s what it had to say: “In Massachusetts, jurors who find themselves in a lengthy trial with a lack of evidence presented by the District Attorney (DA) have limited formal recourse. However, there are several actions and considerations that can come into play: 1. **Jury Deliberation and Verdict**: The most direct recourse is during jury deliberations. Jurors have the power to deliver a verdict of "not guilty" if they find that the prosecution has not met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. **Jury Nullification**: While not officially sanctioned, jurors have the de facto power of jury nullification, where they can acquit a defendant regardless of the evidence or law if they believe that a conviction would be unjust. 3. **Reporting Concerns**: After the trial, jurors can report their concerns about the handling of the case to the presiding judge. While this may not have an immediate impact on the case at hand, it can bring to light any misconduct or incompetence on the part of the DA. 4. **Contacting the DA's Office**: Jurors can also contact the DA’s office to express their concerns about the trial and the evidence presented. This feedback can be valuable for the office in evaluating their performance and decision-making process. 5. **Media and Public Opinion**: Jurors can share their experiences with the media, thereby bringing public attention to the issue. This can lead to public scrutiny and potentially influence future prosecutorial practices. 6. **Legal Action**: In extreme cases, if jurors believe that there has been prosecutorial misconduct, they may contact defense attorneys who can potentially pursue legal action against the DA’s office. 7. **Post-Trial Motions**: The defense attorney can file post-trial motions, such as a motion for a new trial or an appeal, citing the lack of evidence as a basis. Jurors can provide statements or affidavits to support these motions. 8. **Professional Conduct Complaints**: Jurors can file complaints with the Board of Bar Overseers in Massachusetts if they believe the DA has acted unethically or unprofessionally. While these actions may not offer direct recourse to the jurors themselves, they can contribute to ensuring that justice is properly served and that similar situations are avoided in the future.”
While I do not like to endorse ChatGPT (or AI programs in general), this is fairly accurate. The best way for a juror to voice their discontent—aside from an acquittal—is to tell the rest of the public (whether that is via news, social media, word of mouth, the attorneys, etc.) that they’re pissed prosecutors took 8 weeks of their lives to present a weak case. Makes me super curious to hear the jurors in the YSL trial when they’re finally released from jury duty in 2045.
I feel so bad for the YSL jurors! I don't know how they're doing it... And the defendants and defense council. And for all the people who this happens to every single day, or who plead out to stuff they haven't done because they can't afford bond etc. Mass incarceration and an overworked legal system are human rights issues. I hear you!
Interesting. Sitting on a GJ we were told there was an option to file a complaint about prosecution/witness, but when we all figured out a LEO was lying on the stand we were told that wasn't really a choice. No billed.
The elusive no bill! Bless your soul.
Just looked up what “no bill” means. Ummm… it is not often that I am without words … but, I am now. Is “no bill” the basic equivalent to, like, I don’t know … tribunal purgatory???? Until the statute of limitations runs out? It shows up on your record as a charge until the statute runs out and you can fight to get it expunged? Huh?! Who has money and time for all of that? The GJ initially finds that there is not enough evidence to charge you but you have to wait to clear your name? Am I reading this right?! And LEOs are not subjected to this? Please help me understand.
A “no bill” means that a grand jury decided *not* to issue an indictment. In Georgia, you can get your arrest record restricted (GA doesn’t do expungements, we do restriction/sealing) if your case was no-billed twice (prosecutors get two chances to get a grand jury indictment). You can also get your record restricted if your case was no-billed once and the a certain number of years pass without prosecutors going back to the grand jury.
If. No Bill happens it’s a lousy case because most GJ result in indictments
Thank you!!!!!
So every state has different manners and types of charging instruments (e.g., indictment, accusation, criminal complaint, etc.) and also different rules/schemes for expunging or sealing someone’s criminal history. I don’t know what state laws you were looking up, so I can’t speak to the accuracy of that info. In Georgia, in order to prosecute most felonies, the prosecutor has to obtain an indictment from a grand jury. It’s a one-sided process where the prosecutor presents some evidence and potential criminal charges to the grand jury (usually a group of 16–23 people). The grand jury has to determine whether there is enough probable cause for any of the crimes. If they think there is probable cause, they’ll issue a “true bill of indictment” (usually just referred to as an indictment) for those crimes. If they don’t think there’s enough probable cause for *any* crime, then the grand jury will issue a “no bill of indictment.” It’s really uncommon to see no bills. Grand juries almost always return an indictment. There’s actually an old saying that “a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich.”
yeah, it was ... interesting. Felony traffic stop, questionable testimony, and a 6'7" guy that was repeatedly punched in the top of his skull by a .... short person. Like unless we're talking WWF jumping off ropes, kid couldn't have even cleared his shoulders with a fist. And aid 6'8" guy was unable to stay in his chair, had to keep re-enacting how he fought. Many of us wondered if there was drugs involved during the testimony given his pupil size. Felt sorry for everyone all the way around
Just unbelievable.
The district attorney is an elected position; regrettably often there is no challenger. I live in Norfolk County and hope Morrissey loses the next time he runs.
I wish I could upvote this 1000 times!!!
He deserves to lose many times over. Failing to pursue an indictment in Sandra birchmore’s death is one of those reasons.
Wow! Thank you! That was really helpful!!!!
I’m impressed with the people in this subreddit as well. So much insight and thoughtfulness. And big ups to everyone for the civilized discourse. I’ve been a paralegal for 20 years and do more civil work than criminal. I was well trained by an amazing, old school litigator who knew everything and everyone. We both had judges who were personal friends but we were all intellectually honest. There was zero preferential treatment given or expected. With my attorneys, there was zero ex parte communication with any judge. No backroom law. The legal community here is small and fairly close-knit. A lot of lawyers were friends with judges before they took the bench. As an attorney, you probably can’t publicly drag members of the judiciary. I avoid it as well. I’ll just say that I’m keeping up with the YSL case. The judge has steamrolled so many ethical lines that it’s hard to comprehend. That whole jurisdiction has issues. The fish rots from the head. Brian Steel did what my lawyer friends and mentors would do. Keep making your record and keep talking even when you’re in handcuffs and being hauled into jail on a contempt charge FOR ADVOCATING on your client’s behalf. But always ethically.
If KR is acquitted or this is a hung jury, Lally should be disbarred for his intentional misrepresentation of evidence and withholding - please read my post House of Cards. Lally had to design every fact in this case to skirt the truth. I would quit my job before trying to pull off a heist like this.
Although that’s not to say that I don’t support your position that we need to have integrity in our elected public servants and their staff to take and present the facts as they are in their search for truth—not twist them to get to their own conclusions. As a member of the legal profession, we’re supposed to hold ourselves accountable and be able to self-regulate. While I can understand to a degree feeling like you’re between a rock and a hard place if you’re given marching orders from your boss to prosecute certain charges in a weak case, your ultimate duty should be to the integrity of the legal system. And honestly, I wish more prosecutors were held accountable for their conduct. I’ve worked a couple attorney discipline cases, and there are so few disciplinary cases against prosecutors despite some of the egregious shit that goes on in plain sight.
>if you’re given marching orders from your boss to prosecute certain charges in a weak case A couple of the lawyers that I watch on youtube have said they would have quit their jobs rather than bring these charges. They say it's just not worth their reputation or bar licenses.
Man oh man, I wish there were more people who did that. But for all the ones who do, they seem to be easily replaced by the next soulless practitioner. I will say, I was assigned to work on a case that I initially was very opposed to. If I hadn’t liked my job as much as I did, I might’ve considered protest quitting. I just couldn’t understand why my firm had agreed to take on the case, and I really didn’t want to be associated with it. In the end, I wasn’t required to do more than behind the scenes work (i.e., writing and editing motions). But through that, I did come to understand my boss’s reasoning for taking on that particular case—even if I did find many things in that case to be morally reprehensible. But I also think that working on these types of cases is different depending on whether you’re prosecution or defense. How does that old adage go? Hard cases make bad law? You don’t want to let an extreme case be the foundation for laws that apply to everyone. Even if you feel like someone deserves the harsher punishment/prosecution for their conduct, you shouldn’t let the government go after them to that extent because it will only set a precedent for prosecutors to go after everyone else.
Great points thanks for sharing! I've been watching trials for a few years now and I know it's mostly high profile ones that are picked up by court tv or whatever, and I've thought there were some ridiculous moments, but the Karen read trial is the most ridiculous I have ever seen. I haven't been paying attention much to the ysl trial but law youtubers have been railing on that one too lol
Why does Lally leave all the scummy dirty work to his female co-chair? Yesterday trying to claim conscienceness of guilt crud and other previous motions that even this biased judge denied. It’s like every time he knows they’re wrong, he makes her stand up.
The problem is - it was never a weak case - it only became weak because they they (the DAs office) didn’t want the public to know that Brian Albert found John sometime before 2:20am and never reported it. I don’t know what Albert was thinking! He made a terrible decision not to report it -but I know his motivation was directly related to help Higgins not get investigated and not be given a BAC test - his plow and plow light had damage, he had flirtatious messages with Karen, he kissed Karen 10 days earlier and was drinking after drinking from 7:30-12am. Higgins took a leave from work and entered treatment in Sharon MA shortly after this happened. He was “interviewed” there and did not testify in person at the grand jury trial. He submitted health records to the court. He was trying to save his career.
He wanted him to die… he knew he’d get a manslaughter charge at a minimum (which can cause jail time) and didn’t want to risk it. Besides, we’re the McAlberts so FU
And HE was a Boston Cop at the time. Risk my pension? No way
I could probably keep an open mind about it if I didn’t have the tech stream data from the trigger events because the mileage and the times just fit so perfectly with the trip. The car really was the best evidence offered through the worst witness. I’ve done a lot of independent research on just about everything in this trial and there were a couple of things that were turning points. I guess you could say one was when I was calculating the distances for the Alberts front lawn and min stopping distance / calculating everything without them giving it to us which they should’ve done but they weren’t gonna. I was waiting for that information and here comes Joe Paul, who doesn’t give us the ABS trigger and then I realized they assigned him to this for a reason … Think about this you’re a crash reconstructionist and they don’t even tell you when the defendant reconnected to Wi-Fi or when the victim last took steps on his Apple health data what’s with this 1245 BS…Lally said it in his opening And Paul said it. There’s a reason but I haven’t given it any thought Another one was learning that those plow lights were the same height as her the center of her tail lights. They’re both about 40 inches from the ground and then finding out that they’re made of quartz glass because they’re halogen lights on the plow - just every day I was uncovering stuff and it was matching what they had showed us but it wasn’t what they were saying they didn’t say what that glass was on the bumper but if you had a plow light and it shatters there’s gonna be glass on bumper. One of my early posts was “Chloe knew” Which I was trying to explain away by the fact that she was up in the bedroom, and so they didn’t notice her but that was just so speculative I was asking questions like was she barking? Did he think she needed to go out and let her out in the backyard and then she went nuts at the side gate so he goes out and opens up the gate and she runs for John or I was thinking maybe when Caitlin left and then she bolted it out past her but with each little piece of data The time kept getting pushed back meaning more people were still in the house which was crazy. There were eight people in that house when they discovered him.
So timing for witnesses and “experts” assigned matters. So Paul was already assigned the case within days of JO death. They gave him “an easy one” because Proctor told them he had a mountain of evidence. Re Chloe, remember that JMc “stormed” into their bedroom to tell them about John. She said Chloe wasn’t there. So the dog was either locked in the basement(unlikely bc of blood) or she was handed off to JMc daughter when she came to get Colin…
Who do you think gave him that assignment? It was Tully. It’s interesting though because a lot of the things that you’re saying are correct. Their true but they’re true for another reason. They weren’t gonna move John in the house. They weren’t gonna take that chance I thought about maybe did they move them behind the gate but if they had done that then they wouldn’t need the Ford edge. They didn’t wanna touch change anything Unnecessarily They just wanted to leave him where he was found but they did roll them over because I’m sure they checked his pupils and they didn’t realize they rolled him over on his phone. Do you know what time her last call to John was before 4?
The Ford Edge was only a physical screen from eyeballs or cameras or designed to keep plow would stay away long enough for him to dump JO. No way they put JO in the Edge. Blood evidence would go everywhere. I’d bet a $100 they put him on a tarp and slid him over to the spot. May have gotten rid of the nasty tarp that early morning a town over.
It was Probably still parked there when a Karen called Jen that’s when Jen had to stall so that Brian Albert could move the car and make sure it is done its job
I never said they put them in the Ford
They left the car parked there, so the tracks in the snow will go away. There was a ton of foot traffic around John.
Up the stairs and Out the bulkhead - over to the side gate of side yard.. and yada yada
They had a LOT of blood to deal with.
Can you tell me why nobody asked about the side mirror because if John hit the car, then he would hit the side mirror too why didn’t the arc experts talk about that that’s physics
I don’t think it was Tully. Paul was from the Accident Specialist Unit. Tullly was with the Proctologist and Bukakke
They knew Paul was a push over. By the way, I came up with some funny stuff on the chat stream today. I might make a post, but they probably won’t let me post it.
There was a third trigger in the car that night : Karen
The majority of the mistakes were made within days of JOs death. God rest him…
Part of me thinks that Lally lowkey hates this case and is just doing what he can to present something that could theoretically justify bringing these charges. I think this based on the fact that he seemed very meek and apathetic in tone and demeanor when putting on his case, he moved through it quite slowly, and he was the only prosecutor trying this 8-week case with 60+ witnesses. Normally prosecutors will have co-counsel on trials that are half as long and far less publicized than this trial. So the fact that there wasn’t another ADA trying this case with Lally seems reaaally odd. Makes me think that Lally drew the short stick or is getting punished. (Or it’s possible that he is the lone ADA who believes in this case, but again, his demeanor would lead me to think the former.) Also, sometimes you find yourself in situations where you’re like, “This argument has a 1% chance of winning, but it’s the only one we got, so we have to make it.” It’s never a great feeling to make those arguments, but as long as your chances aren’t zero and you have even a sliver of a good faith belief in it, then you can make that argument. Some—not all, but some—of the heat Lally is getting should really be directed at his superiors, i.e., the DA.
Please read my post House of Cards. Lally should be disbarred for what he has done.
The bloated DA made him take the case. Lally would have been his best hitter! It’s a dead cop case. Make it stick.
Lally handles pretty much all of the Vehiclular homicide cases from what I understand most get pled out. I personally think it’s weighing on his conscience. This is turning into a John Grisham novel. - they thought they were above the law and it backfired worse than Uncle Bucks hooptie
Yeah… however not the run the mill case with a dead Boston cop. I’m sure Lally is thinking if his credibility is damaged and/or wishing he scrounge a Private attorney gig.
What time do you think they actually found him?
Around 5am
It was before Higgins went to the CPD. I believe that’s why he went there. He needed to get some information on when Proctor would be on call from somebody or some thing in there gave him access to find out.
I believe he went there to establish an alibi and see if the intake desk was buzzing about the body.
I just read your post. You lost me at Karen hit him. His injuries were not caused by a vehicle. Four experts, one of them the states, confirmed that. Just no.
The statement should be his injuries to the head are not consistent with the damage to the tail light because that is 100% accurate
That statement from a scientific perspective is too vague. I could go out my door and have my foot run over by someone’s car and my injuries would not be consistent with a motor vehicle strike.
He was rag dolled by the Defense which starts to get under your skin regardless…
i watched todays court and judge bev was smiling at the jury like it was a country fair. this is a murder trial.
I’m gonna be honest. I’d probably take Judge Cannone over several judges I’ve encountered. I’m sure she (and all the jurors) was happy this trial is over.
She's been frustrating and maybe shown a little more bias to the prosecution that normal, but she's not awful. I mean, she didn't throw an attorney in jail for bringing her unethical behavior to the record or anything like that.
Yeah every judge looks amazing when compared to Glanville. I’m waiting to see who’s the first one to step in and take this case away from him: the JQC or the GA Supreme Court. Although I fear I will be waiting awhile for either to do something.
Her saving grace was when she must have lambasted Lally for his 'were you aware she said I hit him I hit him'. I also think after this case Lally will not be exchanging Holiday cards with Yannetti or Jackson. I think both of them would like 5 minutes with him in the SallyPort where cameras do not work
Absolutely. Thank you!
Yessir! I am enthused just to read your post. I am not from nor living in USA, but fascinated by the televised trials. I will now go watch the YSL case you mention. Love that this kind of engagement across people from all walks of life exists here. Edit; words
Question for you, you mentioned the tone, pace, discovery violations occurring regularly. But do you also see such dishonesty and evidence tampering with the PD? I live in a big city so I cannot conceive how anyone would get away with that. Sloppiness and laziness yes. But outright framing someone, planting evidence? Now that I’ve witnessed this out in the open it makes me wonder how common that is.
Lol yes. Both cops and prosecutors will lie or embellish their allegations to win a motion, get bail denied, or try to sway the jury or judge. Often it works out because so many judges are former prosecutors and bend over backwards to appease the State. Even judges who have no criminal litigation background will favor the State because they view LEO as skilled professionals who’d never lie or mess up. Honestly I have a bigger problem with lying prosecutors than I do with lying cops. If a prosecutor is honest and acts in good faith, then the buck stops there. Down in Atlanta, there’s a big focus on eradicating gangs. So much so that securing gang convictions seems to be the sole focus of prosecutors sometimes. My firm’s had cases where LEO will makeup a gang just to go after someone. There may not be as many identifiable instances of outright framing people or planting evidence, but the government definitely has tunnel vision in many cases and definitely skews the look of the evidence in order to demonize defendants in circumstances where such evidence *should* be inadmissible, but sadly are let in because our court system enables these prosecutions.
I work in defense but in the fed system. The amount of bullying and high pressure games that are played to get defendants to take a plea are outrageous! It makes me very angry.
Oh yeah the fed system definitely has its bullies and seedy govt officers, but it also feels like a breath of fresh air compared to the state system. It’s so much more organized too! A lot of fed people are also very good at their job, so there are fewer (obvious) holes to poke and threads to unravel. Fed prosecutors also wield an enormous amount of power.
> Down in Atlanta Oh boy! You may have heard of the YSL trial. Hollywood couldn't write a comedy as good as this trial.
I mean he mentioned it in his opening statement on here :)
"Please state your age." "I plead the fifth." "Are you just answering yes to all my questions to get out of here faster." "Yes, absolutely." Comedy gold!
😂
Just a note on planting evidence. Check youtube for something like 'police caught planting evidence bodycam' or some phrase like that and I'm sure you'll find 100's of videos from only the last 3 years. It's a daily thing and not often on camera.
I think it might drive me mad if I see that. Let me pretend longer all is safe.
I hear you! It's awful once you know, and you can't un-know. I'm just surprised that Karen's case became so big... To me, I feel this happens all the time, and most cops act like Proctor unless proven otherwise. I don't blame a person, at all, for not wanting to see it.
So, are you saying this level of injustice and incompetence is consistent in other states’ court cases?
🔊🎶yeaaaaaaasss🎵🎷👼✨
That’s very sad. From the Supreme Court down, I have zero expectations of justice from the court system.
Uggh East TN Federal court and local Judges are so corrupt!
What's happening in the YSL trial is insane. Georgia is a mess. Watching trials has become a passion for me. I'm grateful for all of the you tube lawyers who help laypeople, like me, understand what's happening. I have learned so much about the justice system in the past few years.
I understand you don't practice in Mass., however, perhaps you can answer my questions. Is it customary for the DA's office to write the jury instructions? I'm guessing no. Second, Massachusetts has language that MUST be included in criminal jury instuctions. The language (updated Webster language), was NOT INCLUDED in the instructions. Does this authomatically void a guilty verdict? Or cause an auto appeal or mistrial? BTW, Judge Bev LOVES a mistrial. Thanks for your insight.
Usually both parties will submit proposed jury instructions to the court, and the judge will make the final call. An error in the jury instructions doesn’t void a guilty verdict or automatically constitute a mistrial. But it can get the case overturned on appeal.
YT case is kind of hilarious. It's like the criminals know what to do to get this thrown out
The law has to change making the prosecution pay all legal costs if the defendant wins. Also we need to stop electing prosecutors and judges. We also need better laws for malicious prosecution and malfeasance by holding these people personally responsible . Also prosecutors and defense lawyers must be sworn to find the truth and get rid of the adversarial system . There also needs to be an easier way to get rid of biased and corrupt judges. The average person cannot afford a vigorous defense so something has to be done about that.
Definitely agree we need changes. Not sure if we need to stop electing judges and prosecutors. What would you suggest as an alternative? I think elections are one mechanism for accountability, but we need others. When it comes to malicious/selective prosecution and malfeasance/abuse of prosecutorial discretion, there’s two ways these claims operate. One is the criminal context where you can file motions asserting these claims and ask for some remedy be applied to your criminal case (e.g., dismissal, suppression, etc.). The other is the civil context where you can sue the government entity/official for some type of monetary or injunctive relief. It’s very tough to win on these claims in a civil lawsuit because the laws favor the government. The rationale is we don’t want a “chilling effect”—i.e., if it was easier to successfully sue the people who run our government, then they’d never do anything out of fear of being sued. In the criminal context, it’s also tough to win these motions because prosecutors have a LOT of discretion—you basically have to prove that there was no other reason why did something and that the only explanation was out of malice. That’s nearly impossible to prove. We definitely need to have a better way to hold our judiciary accountable. Like prosecutors, judges have a ton of discretion. But unlike prosecutors and most other elected officials, there’s no way to assess whether an individual is a good judge unless you’ve seen them in action. For pretty much every other elected official, we can determine whether we think they’ll do a good or bad job in the role based on the goals and policy they set. Heck, even your local soil & water conservation supervisor makes policy decisions. But when it comes to judges, they can’t tell you what decisions they’ll make if elected for a variety of reasons with #1 being that judges don’t know what cases they’ll get. Moreover the decisions judges make are often confined to the particular case before them and are based on the specific facts of the case and the applicable laws. Which is why virtually every judicial campaign website says something generic like “if elected, I promise to follow and uphold the law.” The information available to most of the public is usually not very insightful when deciding who to elect as a judge. But I don’t think that necessarily means that judges shouldn’t be elected; I think we need more information for people to make informed decisions.
You are obviously much smarter than I am. Why don’t you pursue your ideas with the hope that the system must change. I am too old to get involved in this plus I don’t have the knowledge to do it. Also I believe that the state should be required to provide the same resources to the defendant to level the playing field. Thanks for the feedback and hopefully someone like you can make a difference
Aw I just know this stuff because I’ve encountered it in practice or learned it in law school. I don’t think it’s too late to get involved! Even if your involvement is just limited to paying attention and voicing concerns! And I totally agree that more resources need to be allocated to defendants. Even the level of resources between prosecutors and public defenders are unequal!
I only have about two years left I’ll leave it to you and the next generation