Karen Read Trial - Take 2 (3 Viewers)

[ASHES]

As we reach nearer and nearer the April 1st retrial date for Karen Read, it seems all the time things are happening. The Commonwealth has desperately tried to exclude the defense dog bite expert and digital forensic examiner, and failed miserably. They also are still not complying with original discovery, as the defense has not received a legit copy of the sallyport video that was introduced doctored at the first trial. Also, there's apparently a new video of the SUV being backed into the sallyport, even though in the video showing it entering from the inside it drove in forward. More exculpatory evidence not turned over to the defense.

Another big happening, is today the Supreme Court of Massachusetts is ruling on the double jeopardy issue (since the jury unanimously voted not guilty on charges 1 and 3, which are murder 2 and leaving the scene of a fatal accident.) If the defense is successful, she will face trial for only the second charge (manslaughter and it's lesser included charges).

Here is the full second charge and the lesser
included offenses the jury didn't agree on:

Offense 2: Manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (Recklessly knowing something like this could result in death)

Check one or both:

• manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (same)
• manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle with a BAL of .08 or greater
• Minimum penalty of 5 years in prison, but punishable by up to 20 years in state prison

Lesser included 1: Involuntary manslaughter (Acted recklessly and showed indifference and disregard, regardless of, if she knew it or not)

• Maximum of 20 years in prison or a minimum of 2.5 years in jail or house of corrections

Lesser included 2: Negligent motor vehicle homicide while operating under the influence (Read acted negligent and knew she might have endangered O’Keefe)

Check one or both:

• Motor Vehicle Homicide by OUI (no negligence)
• And/Or: Motor Vehicle Homicide over the legal limit of .08
• A minimum penalty of 30 days and up to 2 ½ years

This prosecution is so egregious. The Commonwealth of Mass and the city of Canton are going to owe Read millions when this is over. Clear frame job, clear violations of all kinds in the investigation, now nobody in the DA office will touch it so they hired a defense attorney to defend Michael Morrisey (aka continue pursuing the obviously bullshit charges.)


"Hos long to die in the cold" was searched by Jen McCabe at 2:27:40am, the dog did disappear, O'Keefe did have dog bite marks, a top accident reconstruction firm hired by the DOJ says Read's SUV did not strike O'Keefe and O'Keefe's injuries were not caused by a car. Apple Health data shows conclusively O'Keefe went in the house. A witness says he went in the house. Witnesses lying to the federal grand jury and changing their testimonies. Don't even get me started on the sus as **** evidence collecting with no chains of evidence, Solo cups, snowblowers, search and rescue teams, terribly biased investigators, and more. It's such a cluster and I can't believe it's still going on.

 

[Allan]

I've seen some of this on the news but not all the details. What is the relevance of the dog?

 

[ASHES]

I've seen some of this on the news but not all the details. What is the relevance of the dog?

John O'Keefe (the victim) had large wounds on his arm that by all accounts (except the Commonwealth which creates it's own fantasy physics) are dog bites/clawmarks. The CW claims they are cuts from the taillight breaking. When viewed with his shirt, and considering the dog bite expert that says it's a dog bite, with no contradicting expert opinions, one concludes it's from a dog attack. The Alberts had a German Shepherd that was agressive and had bitten before, and was defensive of the yard and house from strangers. They got rid of the dog shortly after. Said she was rehomed in another state for nothing to do with anything.

"Taillight damage"


The longsleeve hoody he was wearing. The arrows are pointing out punctures in the fabric.

 

[Allan]

John O'Keefe (the victim) had large wounds on his arm that by all accounts (except the Commonwealth which creates it's own fantasy physics) are dog bites/clawmarks. The CW claims they are cuts from the taillight breaking. When viewed with his shirt, and considering the dog bite expert that says it's a dog bite, with no contradicting expert opinions, one concludes it's from a dog attack. The Alberts had a German Shepherd that was agressive and had bitten before, and was defensive of the yard and house from strangers. They got rid of the dog shortly after. Said she was rehomed in another state for nothing to do with anything.

"Taillight damage"
View attachment 67555516

The longsleeve hoody he was wearing. The arrows are pointing out punctures in the fabric.
View attachment 67555517
View attachment 67555518

So no DNA testing was done on the wounds? There'd be a hell of a lot from dog saliva if he was attacked.

 

[ASHES]

So no DNA testing was done on the wounds? There'd be a hell of a lot from dog saliva if he was attacked.

There was sloppy dna testing done. It couldn't be confirmed or excluded from evidence collected from his shirt. They didn't even try him. Also I believe he was wearing a jacket that I don't think was recovered. They recovered the hat and shoes and belt and hoody, but I don't remember the jacket.

 

[Allan]

If that was taillight damage his blood should be on the broken pieces. Guess that wasn't tested for either?

 

[ASHES]

If that was taillight damage his blood should be on the broken pieces. Guess that wasn't tested for either?

It wasn't on any of the taillight pieces or the housing. But they found a hair sitting on the bumper (after multiple drives through the blizzard) that they claim was O'Keefe's but was destroyed in testing. Even if it was, it isn't very good evidence of the state's claim.

 

[ASHES]

If that was taillight damage his blood should be on the broken pieces. Guess that wasn't tested for either?

Speaking of testing for DNA, they collected 6 red Solo cups of blood evidence, and then stored them together without labeling them or where they came from at the scene, in a fridge in the sallyport of the conflicted off the case police department, and then never tested it for anything. Don't even know if it was O'Keefe's blood.

 

[holbritter]

As we reach nearer and nearer the April 1st retrial date for Karen Read, it seems all the time things are happening. The Commonwealth has desperately tried to exclude the defense dog bite expert and digital forensic examiner, and failed miserably. They also are still not complying with original discovery, as the defense has not received a legit copy of the sallyport video that was introduced doctored at the first trial. Also, there's apparently a new video of the SUV being backed into the sallyport, even though in the video showing it entering from the inside it drove in forward. More exculpatory evidence not turned over to the defense.

Another big happening, is today the Supreme Court of Massachusetts is ruling on the double jeopardy issue (since the jury unanimously voted not guilty on charges 1 and 3, which are murder 2 and leaving the scene of a fatal accident.) If the defense is successful, she will face trial for only the second charge (manslaughter and it's lesser included charges).

Here is the full second charge and the lesser
included offenses the jury didn't agree on:

Offense 2: Manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (Recklessly knowing something like this could result in death)

Check one or both:

• manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle under the influence (same)
• manslaughter while operating a motor vehicle with a BAL of .08 or greater
• Minimum penalty of 5 years in prison, but punishable by up to 20 years in state prison

Lesser included 1: Involuntary manslaughter (Acted recklessly and showed indifference and disregard, regardless of, if she knew it or not)

• Maximum of 20 years in prison or a minimum of 2.5 years in jail or house of corrections

Lesser included 2: Negligent motor vehicle homicide while operating under the influence (Read acted negligent and knew she might have endangered O’Keefe)

Check one or both:

• Motor Vehicle Homicide by OUI (no negligence)
• And/Or: Motor Vehicle Homicide over the legal limit of .08
• A minimum penalty of 30 days and up to 2 ½ years

This prosecution is so egregious. The Commonwealth of Mass and the city of Canton are going to owe Read millions when this is over. Clear frame job, clear violations of all kinds in the investigation, now nobody in the DA office will touch it so they hired a defense attorney to defend Michael Morrisey (aka continue pursuing the obviously bullshit charges.)


"Hos long to die in the cold" was searched by Jen McCabe at 2:27:40am, the dog did disappear, O'Keefe did have dog bite marks, a top accident reconstruction firm hired by the DOJ says Read's SUV did not strike O'Keefe and O'Keefe's injuries were not caused by a car. Apple Health data shows conclusively O'Keefe went in the house. A witness says he went in the house. Witnesses lying to the federal grand jury and changing their testimonies. Don't even get me started on the sus as **** evidence collecting with no chains of evidence, Solo cups, snowblowers, search and rescue teams, terribly biased investigators, and more. It's such a cluster and I can't believe it's still going on.

I've turned into a little bit of a Court TV Live junkie
Not sure where I stand yet as I've missed the first trial and have just been keeping track of all the proceedings going on now.

 

[ASHES]

I've turned into a little bit of a Court TV Live junkie
Not sure where I stand yet as I've missed the first trial and have just been keeping track of all the proceedings going on now.

There's a ton of conflicting information, which isn't surprising given the Commonwealth can't even keep their story straight. When you see dumb thing after dumb thing and coincidence after coincidence coming from them though, it stops looking like just not guilty oops made a mistake, but seriously malicious.

 

[holbritter]

There's a ton of conflicting information, which isn't surprising given the Commonwealth can't even keep their story straight. When you see dumb thing after dumb thing and coincidence after coincidence coming from them though, it stops looking like just not guilty oops made a mistake, but seriously malicious.

Don't know what's up in MA, but I just saw a bench trial where the Commonwealth was trying to convict someone of murder because they were in a scuffle with someone with a bad heart, who ended up having a heart attack and dying. Said since she knew he had a heart condition, her arguing was 'intentional'.
Their pathologist put cause of death 'homocide'.

Judge didn't buy it. Imagine what a precedent that would set!?

 

[ASHES]

Don't know what's up in MA, but I just saw a bench trial where the Commonwealth was trying to convict someone of murder because they were in a scuffle with someone with a bad heart, who ended up having a heart attack and dying. Said since she knew he had a heart condition, her arguing was 'intentional'.
Their pathologist put cause of death 'homocide'.

Judge didn't buy it. Imagine what a precedent that would set!?

That was just as dumb. Glad she was acquitted. Same judge, Cannone, same DA, Michael Morrisey.

 

[holbritter]

Ruling in .SC agrees with Judge Cannone. Correctly denied defendants request to dismiss.

 

[ASHES]

Ruling in .SC agrees with Judge Cannone. Correctly denied defendants request to dismiss.

Ridiculous.

 

[Allan]

So based on what's been posted on this thread I'd say that the victim's cause of death can't be determined.

So a dog or wife might get away with murder, or maybe it was an entirely accidental death.

I'd love to be the defence attorney on this case.

 

[ASHES]

So based on what's been posted on this thread I'd say that the victim's cause of death can't be determined.

So a dog or wife might get away with murder, or maybe it was an entirely accidental death.

Cause of death was exposure to the cold. He also had a fracture on his skull that would have most likely incapacitated him. So knocked out and left to die in the cold. Homicide, or undetermined. In any case, his injuries were not consistent with a car strike. No bruising to the torso or other broken bones there or the limbs, common car strike injuries. Just the taillight scratches, from which they said he flew 20 feet or so, but he didn't bruise or break that arm.

As for what actually happened, yeah, could be lots of things. Dog jumped him and he fell down stairs and hit his head. Or a play fight got out of control and dog got involved, or who knows. But they didn't call him help, they dumped him in the front yard to die. And searched for "hos long to die in the cold."

 

[Allan]

And searched for "hos long to die in the cold."

Who searched that?

 

[ASHES]

Who searched that?

Jennifer McCabe. The star witness who only remembered after the fact, and through ever changing testimony in front of different grand juries, that Read confessed to her that she said "I hit him I hit him I hit him." That is another whole level of malarkey.

 

[ASHES]

Today is a motions day, both sides filing various things in preparation for trial. The defense is asking for more discovery, because for one, there’s still no chain of custody for the sallyport video (either version of it) which were admitted after the trial had already started. Now there’s a third version of the video turned over to the defense after the first trial, still with no chain of custody, no employee of the DA, Canton PD or MPD claiming custody of it or knowing anything about it. The videos just showed up at the DAs office. The commonwealth is arguing that they can’t produce a record of where the videos came from because no record exists, but they should still get to use them. The other is for case files on the Sandra Birchmore case, because there are a lot of the same people involved in that case as Read’s case and they cleared a fellow law enforcement officer who turned out to be the killer.

The commonwealth has a motion for sanctions about something silly or other. Will see if I can find out anything. It probably won’t go anywhere, Brennen has lost almost all of the pretrial motions so far. He did win one not granting the defense request for fees for having their experts fly out for a pointless hearing the commonwealth asked for.

Also rather interesting, is that a Read juror has done an interview with Aiden Kearny, the first juror to do so. Aiden’s lawyer Mark Bederow has also now joined the Read defense team. (Kearny is facing multiple felonies for witness intimidation of Read case witnesses which will be dismissed in short order). Brennen isn’t happy about it, claims they’re already sharing discovery they shouldn’t be.

 

[ASHES]

I wonder what this is about. The federal investigation and it’s independent conclusion should have given her grave concern before the last trial. Maybe someone got indicted, (Proctor, Morrisey?), or someone from the commonwealth has to testify for a grand jury or interview with the FBI (Brennen, Lalley)?

 

[ASHES]

"The Commonwealth just provided the court with information that causes me grave concern," Cannone said nearly 20 minutes after calling the recess. "The implications of that information may have profound effects on this defense and defense counsel. So for that reason I'm going to suspend today, so that when we meet again to address these issues, all affected will be appropriately prepared."



Commonwealth has been mudslinging all day, could be anything. "They're collaborating with witness intimidation!"(they're not) "They paid the experts but said they didn't!"(they didn't pay the experts to reach the conclusions they reached independently, of course they had to pay for travel and expenses and fees.) Or who knows what.

 

[ASHES]

So it looks like perhaps Brennen took a part of an email with ARCCA and the defense out of context and misrepresented it's meaning to the court (in an attempt to remove Alan Jackson from the case), and Judge Cannone bit the bait and went off on the defense without allowing them a chance to respond, even Brennen clarified a bit and she still gave the ridiculous statement in court about the defense. She is showing her colors. Another reason for her to recuse (but she won't voluntarily.)


"information that causes me grave concern"

"may have profound effects on this defense and defense counsel"



Very inappropriate for allegations that were based on a misrepresentation that was corrected in front of her and the defense wasn't allowed to address. And now Brennen doesn't have to worry about losing a bunch of defense motions until next Tuesday.

 

[ASHES]

Where were her words when the Commonwealth introduced false evidence, and didn't produce discoverable evidence until during and after the first trial? Crickets on criticism for the Commonwealth.

 

[ASHES]

More and more interesting. Read has now filed a federal civil lawsuit against Norfolk County Superior Court and the Massachusetts Attorney General regarding the flagrant violation of her due process rights under the Constitution, specifically the right against double jeopardy.

 

[ASHES]

So the Judge Cannone thing is about ARCCA, but it isn't going to go well for her or the Commonwealth. The CW misrepresented something, the judge reacted over the top for how she should even if it were true, Brennen corrected himself later but the defense was still not given a chance to respond. At worst, there's a late discovery production from the defense with no prejudice to the CW, but she sure didn't talk like that to Lally when he didn't produce discovery until mid-trial and even after the trial, and without proper chain of custody.