• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anyone following the Karen Read trial? (1 Viewer)

Agrees that he's talked about the case with his family, in person, phone calls and texts. Has also had multiple conversations about it with his in-laws, including multiple conversations with Brian Albert.

Agreed he never saw any damage to the rear of the SUV. Never saw damage on the right taillight. Doesn't recall if the headlights were on but assumes they were. Says at some point after the SUV was gone, he had noticed V shaped tire tracks in the road, consistent with a vehicle making a 3 point turn. Doesn't remember seeing the tire marks when he pulled in and it was just the Jeep parked in front of the mailbox.

Now talking about the conversation with O'Keefe in the car about how to get to 34 Fairview. The directions that her and his wife gave would have had the SUV coming from the opposite direction as the SUV in front of the house was facing. When it was parked the house was to its left, if they followed the McCabe's directions it would have been on their left when they arrived.

After giving the directions, O'Keefe never called back for clarification. Agrees he assumed the SUV would be coming from the Chapman side of Fairview. The witness is handed another document.

It's a map showing Cedercrest Rd, interrsecting with Fairview Rd, on the other side of Fairview Rd. it shows Chapman St meeting Fairview, and some other roads in the neighborhood.
 
Finally a map. First one we've seen.

IMG_5297.jpeg

He agrees the red marker is 34 Fairview. Agrees that if Read and O'Keefe followed their directions, they would have turned left onto Fairview from Chapman, going towards Cedercrest. Agrees that means the driver's side would be facing the Albert's property. Agrees he never saw the black SUV traveling that direction or parked in that direction.
 
When he looked across the lawn to see the tire tracks in the street, he did not see anything in the yard. Never heard any yelling or screaming from outside. Never heard any crash noises. Says there was music playing inside the house, he didn't hear anything outside.

Confirms he left around 1:40-145wm, with his wife Jennifer McCay, and Brian Albert Jr's friends Sarah Levinson and Julie Hagel. Doesn't recall who was where when they walked out of the house to the car but they all left at the same time. Agrees that the front lawn was in front of them when they walked out the front door.

Says the black SUV was gone when they walked outside. Agrees when he came out he didn't see a black baseball hat, or a shoe in the snow, or a bunch of pieces of red taillight or even one, or O'Keefe laying in the lawn. No e of the 3 people he was with said anything about seeing anything, he agrees. Doesn't recall going back into the house for anything.
 
Asked about a group text chat with 3 other people. Doesn't recall who with. Reminded it was with his wife Jennifer McCabe, also Brian Albert, and Nicole Albert. That refreshed his recollection about the group chat.

Asked if he would agree, that on Feb 1st, 2022 (3 days after O'Keefe's death), he was at the Albert home at 34 Fairview. He doesn't recall, but says he could have been. Asked if he recalls watching what investigators were doing in the neighborhood on February 1st. He does not recall that, but if he could see the texts it might refresh his memory.

Laughs when asked he doesn't recall monitoring what the troopers were doing, interrupting the question with his answer.
IMG_5299.jpeg

His answer was that he was not monitoring what the troopers were doing. Says if he had driven down there, dropping someone off or picking someone up, then he might have seen the troopers, but he was not monitoring anything.

Directed to 2/1/2022 at 1:34:27PM, asks if he texted the group chat "Troopers back out front, but in front of the Asian house", he responds"if I texted that, you could show it to me", Yannetti hands Lally a document, then hands it to the witness.
IMG_5300.jpeg
 
He says he sees he texted what Yannetti says he texted.

Question: Mr McCabe, what is an Asian house?

Answer: The next door neighbours to the Alberts were Asian.

Says he had no idea their last name was Chung, he'd never met them. When he texted that, he confirms nobody in the chat asked him to clarify what house he was talking about. Asked if Brian responded with a question "Right now?" Says yes, he thinks that's what he saw on the document. Asked if he responded "yes", he asks if he gets to see all the texts or no. Yannetti will give him the previous page of texts. Gives him both pages so he can see the texts in context.

Agrees that is what the texts show he said. Then asked if he texted the group he was trying to get a picture of what he was seeing. His response is he didn't see that on the texts (that he was just shown.)

Asked that he doesn't deny he said that, his response is "can you show me the texts please."
 
Last edited:
The witness is given 2 new pages of texts after review by Lally. Borrows a cellphone from a xourt employee for the flashlight so he can read them. Complains they are too dark. After his review, he is asked again if he texted the group he was trying to get a picture of what the troopers were doing.

He says yes, he said he was going to try to take a photo. Asked if he was watching what was going on February 1st, he says no, he just happened to be driving through the neighborhood at that moment. 🤣

Asked if he didn't just continue driving up the road and leave the area, he says he thinks he did. Doesn't know if he took a picture or not. Says he wasn't monitoring what was going on, he just happened to drive by at that moment.

Sidebar. Jury exits after the sidebar. Recess.
 
Back from recess, resuming cross examination of Matthew McCabe.

First he is given the 4 pages of texts to confirm that's what he was shown before, and that it's an accurate representation of the content and sequence of the group text chat, he does. They are entered into evidence.

IMG_5302.jpeg

IMG_5303.jpeg
IMG_5304.jpeg
 
He's not sure he if he was still at 34 Fairview when he sent tr he 'Yes' text, but he must have been in the area.

Response from Brian Albert:
IMG_5305.jpeg

He doesn't have a memory of where Brian was at the time, but assumes not at home.

He responded:
IMG_5306.jpeg

IMG_5307.jpeg
 
Brian's response: "Pk" (typo of Ok)
IMG_5308.jpeg

Asked if at 3:01:48pm, he commented on the phone interview with Proctor and Kerry (sp?) Roberts in the group chat. Objected to twice and sustained. After sidebar, Yannetti hands the witness more pages of the group texts.

Confirms that the new texts are from the same group text chat as the earlier texts. They discuss some of the content, saying they hope the troopers don't think she's making it up after the fact (Kerry Roberts I assume). Refreshes his recollection that he's talking about Kerry Roberts with Brian Albert with another page of texts. Says he was letting Brian know that Kerry Roberts was being interviewed by Proctor.

Some more new texts from the group were objected to, some sustained, some allowed.
 
Asked if on February 1st, 2022, at 12:51:49pm, he texted the group chat (Matt, Jen, Brian and Nicole), to ask Chris to ask some questions. He says yes that's correct. Confirms Chris is Chris Albert.

He then is asked if he next texted the group "tell them the guy never went in the house". He says correct, it's part of the same text. Asked who the guy is he was referring to, answers it was John O'Keefe.

Wow, that doesn't look good. Looks like witnesses collaborating on a story to tell the police.

When asked if that was him talking about getting their stories straight, he says "no."
IMG_5309.jpeg

Asked if he would agree that their stories are all straight that O'Keefe never went in the house. Answer, "John never went in the house. It's not a story it's a fact."
IMG_5310.jpeg

Asked if Brian was still part of the discussion when he said that, he confirms that he was. Asked if Brian responded to that message, he confirms that he did. He confirms Brian is the oldest of the Albert siblings, which includes Chris. Asked if Brian's response was "exactly", he confirms that it was his response.

Cross done.
 
Lally redirect.

Asked if O'Keefe never went in the house that night, he says that is correct. Asked if Chris was at the house that night, he says he was not. Asked if the where, why and how of O'Keefe's tragic death was something he discussed within the family, he confirms that it was.

When asked why, he says because nobody knew what had happened. Says O'Keefe never showed up, never came inside, so they had no idea what happened to him. Says it's correct he was friends with O'Keefe. Asked if he told anyone what to say at anytime to state police, or any other investigators, he says "No."

Asked if anyone in his family or in his presence tell anyone that in front of him, he says no. Asked about when he was looking out at the SUV, if his focus was on the SUV, he says it was. Asked if any time he had looked out, if he ever saw a pickup truck outside, he says he knew it was there, but he wasn't looking there, he was focusing on the SUV.

Says the tire marks he saw were after the truck was there. Asked about when he was asked about being able to see O'Keefe in the SUV from in the house (he said he didn't), confirms he did not see him. Says he couldn't see anyone in the SUV.

He says he didn't hear Julie Nagel make statements about a black object, but that he's not saying she didn't say it.

Asked about February 1st, he says he doesn't recall what he was doing when he drove by 34 Fairview that day. He doesn't recall exactly what he did that day. He says based on the text messages from earlier, he thinks he was doing something, picking up a car, or something, he doesn't recall where.

Asked about the "looks like more had been dug up" text, he doesn't recall sending the text. Asked if he recalls what they were digging, he does recall they were digging out the snow.

Asked about when he and his wife were talking to O'Keefe giving directions, and there was reference to a specific house, he says O'Keefe had had a relationship with the woman who lived there. Asked if he had ever heard from him again after that, he says he never heard from O'Keefe again.

Redirect done.
 
Re-cross by Yannetti.

Asked about the redirect question where he'd been asked if he'd ever told anyone what to tell the state police and investigators, his answer had been no, he confirms, saying "I don't, I don't recall telling anyone to tell anybody anything."

Asked in his statement, "tell them the guy never went in the house", who is the "them"? He asks to review the texts. Says the "them" was Channel 4 that went to Chris's pizza shop.

Asked if he was instructing the people in the group chat to tell channel 4 that the guy never came in the house, he says
"As I said, none of us in the house had any idea what happened to John O'Keefe, so we instructed-, we just I, I was saying, we don't know what happened he never came in the house."

Yannetti says he didn't ask about any of that. He just asked who the them was. McCabe says it looked like he wanted him to elaborate. Yannetti asks if channel 4 is the them that should be told he never went in the house. Says yes that's who he was referencing.

Re-cross done. He is excused.
 
In a group chat: "Tell them the guy never went into the house" --- WTF. Why on earth would anyone be telling other witnesses to say that to the investigator?
 
Next witness, Jennifer McCabe.

Yesss! Although I shouldn't get too excited, probably won't get to see cross until Monday.

She takes the oath, will she honor it?
IMG_5311.jpeg

IMG_5312.jpeg


Direct examination. Starts off with life history.

Gets to the point starting on Friday night, January 28th 2022, she did sports teams mom stuff for dinner and after that, went to the high school basketball game. Mentioned she had a drink with dinner, but skipped over what or how much. After the basketball game (she was a coach), she went to the Waterfall bar, at around 9pm, with Matthew. Drove her GMC Yukon Denali.

Says she had her cell phone. Doesn't think her cell phone was connected to her car's Bluetooth. Says she waited a few minutes after getting there to go in because her husband was on the phone. They went in and sat at the third table with Chris and Julie Albert, Nicole Albert, Caitlin Albert, and Tristan Morris. Then another couple and Brian Albert and Brian Higgens arrived, and O'Keefe and Read last.
 
In a group chat: "Tell them the guy never went into the house" --- WTF. Why on earth would anyone be telling other witnesses to say that to the investigator?
If you believe him, he was telling Chris (who wasn't part of the group chat) that, 'them' was Channel 4.
 
This has to be the sloggiest trial I've ever watched. We're going over and over and over the same stuff that doesn't matter with very little evidence of anything.
 
This has to be the sloggiest trial I've ever watched. We're going over and over and over the same stuff that doesn't matter with very little evidence of anything.
Has more lying witnesses than I've seen in any murder trial.
 
Says she left Waterfall at around midnight, a little after, give or take. Says the group demeanor was fine, typical night, friendly normal, just out having a drink listening to music. Says Read and O'Keefe arrived at around 11pm. She noticed that Read had brought a glass in with her, said she took it out of her coat and kind of chuckled about it.

When asked if she observed anything about the glass, thought about it for a full 6 seconds before "I believe it had ridges on it." Asked about what was in the glass, answers it was clear. Doesn't remember if it had a straw or lime or anything like that.

Says she was aware they had come from CF McCarthy's bar right up the street. Asked about what she herself had been drinking, she thinks beer. Can't be certain about what O'Keefe was drinking, possibly a beer. Says again all she saw Read drinking was a glass with clear liquid. Doesn't remember if she saw her drinking from a different glass than the first one.

Says Read had talked to her about taking O'Keefe's niece to Dunkin donuts, and how that frustrated him, thinking along the lines she's going to expect it every day, and then they talked about how challenging it is with kids (a lot of 'you knows' in there), says she said that's all they ever really fight about, says Read felt frustrated and that his family needed to be doing more to help, and she wishes she had more time with him alone.

She repeats the story about Read asking to go to the pizza shop, says she brought it up many times. Talks about the weight loss challenge again as the reason they didn't want to.

Says after the general invite to go to Brian's house, she briefly spoke with O'Keefe and Read in the Waterfall parking lot, about them coming over to Brian's. Says it had started snowing by the time they were leaving Waterfall. Says she waited in her car a short time and saw him walking and pulled up.

That's all I'm gonna watch tonight. There's about half an hour left of her testimony from today.
 
First of all this case is in northwest Massachusetts where they honor thieves and hate law enforcement.

Judge just announced the trial will move to a smaller courtroom.

Only media and close family will be allowed in his courtroom.

I'm thinking the judge doesn't want turtle boy's whack job supporters screwing up the trial.

Opening statements Monday.
It's neither in northwest or northeast Massachusetts Screenshot 2024-05-17 at 10.12.30 PM.png
 
Lawtubers reacting to

"Tell them the guy never went into the house"

7:21
 
Yet another witness, Jennifer McCabe who heard hysterical, frantic, guilty Karen say I hit him, I hit him, I hit him. Yesterday Jennifer came across as clear, concise and truthful ..she's a mother, a wife and a coach. The dream team needs to be careful with the way they approach this mom on cross. Slick, aggressive, loud, fast talking tactics could backfire. So, let me add all of it up now, the massive conspiracy to frame poor Karen Read includes the State Police, the Local Police, the DA's office, some Firemen and some EMT's, the Albert's, the McCabe's and I"m sure I left a few out. Bottom line, Friday was a good day for the Prosecution

The harassment of these families is shameful, threats, phone calls, going to homes with signs and bull horns all speaks to the to the whacked out "Save Karen Read" citizenry in that area. I just hope some jurors didn't sneak in with a mission. I put nothing past the local extremist, conspiracy nutjobs.
 
dream team

Sleazy tactics

dream team is salivating

dream teams

Jackson and his dream team

Karen's dream team.

the dream team

the dream team.

the dream team

her dream team

Can you imagine being the wife of someone like Jackson

the Dream Team

the Dream Team.

had the dream team shrieking with frustration

the dream team

The dream team

slick, fast talking defense attorney's

slick Alan Jackson

slick, fast talking Alan Jackson

slick, fast talking lawyers

slick efforts

slick as Jackson

your slick with your snarky remarks.

Jackson's slick Interrogation

Jackson slick lawyerly skills

Slick, aggressive, loud


None of that is evidence against Read. The evidence you do address has massive holes. And will never convict her. The witnesses you believe, are inconsistent, with convenient memory loss. The jury can see right through the bull. Regarding the black SUV, none of the 5 people testifying they saw it that night agree on much about it, except it never moved backwards, and they never saw O'Keefe around it or in it at 34 Fairview. Nobody saw him lying in the yard. Nobody heard anything unusual like yelling, engine revving, crashing, etc.

You claim she had something like 9 drinks. The only evidence that's been shown by the prosecution of her drinking is that she had one drink with her at both bars. And it could have been water for all we know.

"I hit him" is weak. Nobody claimed it at the time. Nobody put it in their reports. Nobody told anyone at the hospital. How it was said and to whom has changed, and is inconsistent. Others who should have heard it when some of them claim to, didn't, and claim she was screaming something else.
 
Wouldn't it be to clear to a forensic pathologist if he was hit by a car or beat to death in the house? Or is this only on TV series?
 
Wouldn't it be to clear to a forensic pathologist if he was hit by a car or beat to death in the house? Or is this only on TV series?
His manner of death is undetermined. His cause of death is multiple blunt force trauma to the head, with hypothermia contributing. It appears his injuries are inconsistent with the state's theory.
 
His manner of death is undetermined. His cause of death is multiple blunt force trauma to the head, with hypothermia contributing. It appears his injuries are inconsistent with the state's theory.
So a forensic pathologist can't tell the difference from a car collision and/or run over by tires vs. a physical beating? I guess I've been overestimating forensic pathology.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom