• 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!

Karen Read Trial - Take 2

He tells the jurors the Proctor texts he didn't expect anyone to ever see are evidence number 209.
 
Says Proctor came to his conclusion after mere hours, after talking to 3 people named Albert or McCabe.
 
Asks if MSP can't trust Proctor to investigate, why should the jury on this case? Points out the Commonwealth didn't call their lead investigator. Points out all the evidence went through Proctor. The shirts, and the shards. Missing for months.
 
Points out the only O'Keefe dna came from the smooth part of the outside plastic on the taillight, and had two other unknown males with it.
 
Points out criminologist Hanley had inconvenient testimony for the Commonwealth. No bumper glass matched the drinking glass. It only matched a piece of Proctor glass from 34 Fairview. Asks how it got sprinkled on the bumper.
 
Matt McCabe "tell them to say the guy never came in the house"
Brian Albert "exactly"
 
Why did Proctor wait over a year to interview Lucky, and say the road wasn't plowed?
 
Of course, the deleted 2:27am search on Jennifer McCabe's phone.
 
Asks if it didn't happen, why did she create a lie that Read screamed at her to search it, including getting Kerry Roberts to claim she heard it. But then Roberts admitted she committed perjury.

"She's telling them everything"

Gets into all the contradictions with "I hit him." Says first Jennifer McCabe told police Read had said "did I hit him, could I have hit him."
 
I think I am a couple mins ahead. Currently talking about Proctor and the tail light pieces
 
Heh, just pointed out the lie from Brennan on the sweatshirt (hoodie)
 
Poi Stout the sallyport video that would prove or disprove Fever's claim Hgins was in the sallyport with the SUV aswas mysteriously missing. It's just gone.

Then officer Barros and "absolutely not" that the taillight was completely broken. Says you don't even have to take his word for it, you can just watch the video that shows it.
 
No taillight was found until after the SUV was in Proctor's possession.
 
Ooohhhh he got the mirrored sallyport video from the last trial in. Game, set, match. Commonwealth can't be trusted. (And the hoodie lie still to come.)
 
I was wrong, he started differently, says the tail light was shattered.... she was drunk, she hit him.
 
Plays the video of Welcher moving his arm into the taillight to match the Commonwealth's intended outcome.
 
Don't let the Commonwealth or Proctor get away with it. Remember his texts. "She's ****ed."
 
Just finished defense closing, Brennan starting now. I'm 17 minutes behind now.
 
"debris field all over the front yard"

Oops. That proves it was sprinkled. Guess he forgot what happens to the taillight pieces after he taillight breaks.
 
He says the evidence proves she did it. For example the battery. But it doesn't. It shows a flat line where he wasn't outside until shortly before he was found.

 
I'm disregarding all the stuff about the drinking. It's irrelevant to whether there was actually a collision or not.
 
Lmao at Brennan saying there was no animosity between O'Keefe and Higgins. Bud, we saw the video. We read the texts.
 
Again he says her taillight is all over the yard, without a hint of the irony of that statement that it isn't consistent with what happens to the taillight pieces when it breaks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…