• 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 doesn't explain why she's leaving him angry voice messages if she knew she hit him, which is what he's attempting to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
He doesn't explain how O'Keefe is still walking after the adjusted time skew says he should be dead or dying.
 
Playing the voicemails. This slide lies by omission. It leaves out the 9 or whatever butt calls from Jennifer McCabe. And again, the battery data only confirms he wasn't outside all night.
1749829848666.webp
 
Still pushing the cell phone outside nonsense. Seems to think O'Keefe's cooling body would have perfectly kept the temperature I guess, until it didn't.
IMG_7929.webp
 
He's talking about what Jennifer McCabe and Kerry Roberts said, but completely glossing over their lies.
 
Lmao at him calling the light snowfall at 6am "a blizzard". That's a total lie. The storm didn't pick up until that evening. On Fairview, you could see quite a distance as shown in the dashcam videos.
 
Jackson's drama queen closing summation, embarrassingly grasping at straws. He lied through out his 1 hour an 15 minutes, which he ran way over on. I wish the judge had stopped the rambling drama queen. He repeated himself over and over and over, pleading and begging the jury to see the trial his way. D+. Bottom line the jurors have already made up they're minds, this is all theater.
 
Says O'Keefe was "right there by the side of the road." BULLSHIT!

He was by the flag pole. About 10 feet from the road. He says Rentschler and Wolfe said he was 20 feet from the road, but that isn't what they said. They said the total distance he would have had to travel to get where he was was 20 feet, because he wasn't projected into the yard 10 feet at a 90 degree angle, it would have been a different angle, say 45 degrees, which means that the total distance traveled is farther than the distance to the road.
 
ASHES said:
Jury could come back with a verdict today. Wouldn't that be fun.
Click to expand...
That would be crazy. I have to imagine there is some dissent somewhere. What were the charges?

2nd degree murder
Leaving the scene
??
 
gboisjo said:
Jackson's drama queen closing summation, embarrassingly grasping at straws. He lied through out his 1 hour an 15 minutes, which he ran way over on. I wish the judge had stopped the rambling drama queen. He repeated himself over and over and over, pleading and begging the jury to see the trial his way. D+. Bottom line the jurors have already made up they're minds, this is all theater.
Click to expand...
This isn't true or an objective analysis of the defense closing. What specifically did he lie about?
 
gboisjo said:
Jackson's drama queen closing summation, embarrassingly grasping at straws. He lied through out his 1 hour an 15 minutes, which he ran way over on. I wish the judge had stopped the rambling drama queen. He repeated himself over and over and over, pleading and begging the jury to see the trial his way. D+. Bottom line the jurors have already made up they're minds, this is all theater.
Click to expand...
So glad I am not the only biased person here.

Felt the same way with Brennan, droning, lying, misrepresenting. I had to stop listening as he said a bunch of crap.
 
daeler said:
That would be crazy. I have to imagine there is some dissent somewhere. What were the charges?

2nd degree murder
Leaving the scene
??
Click to expand...
Manslaughter and maybe some lesser included offenses to that. We haven't heard the exact charging document given to the jury, but it should be similar to what the first trial had.


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
 
Did you notice @gboisjo, when I accused Brennan of lying, how I pointed out a specific lie, and explained why it's a lie? If Jackson's hour and a half was all a lie, you would have had no problem doing the same.
 
I think David Yannetti should have done the closing for the defense, he doesn't look as sinister as Jackson. Likability of the lawyer's carries a bunch of weight. Especially in a trial like this where there are so many variables.
 
gboisjo said:
I think David Yannetti should have done the closing for the defense, he doesn't look as sinister as Jackson. Likability of the lawyer's carries a bunch of weight. Especially in a trial like this where there are so many variables.
Click to expand...
Trials are not a popularity contest. Your analysis is completely wrong. The evidence is what matters. Given the evidence, plus your opinion of the defense attorneys, it is no surprise you claim otherwise. You would convict Read based simply on her choice of attorney.
 
gboisjo said:
I think David Yannetti should have done the closing for the defense, he doesn't look as sinister as Jackson. Likability of the lawyer's carries a bunch of weight. Especially in a trial like this where there are so many variables.
Click to expand...
I think Jackson did fine, a bit long but he made some really good points.

The part about Brennan and the cuts in the hoodie was brutal. That part will stick with the jurors if you ask me.
 
At some point while I was typing, Brennan finished his closing. I guarantee he did not cure all the reasonable doubts.
 
ASHES said:
Did you notice @gboisjo, when I accused Brennan of lying, how I pointed out a specific lie, and explained why it's a lie? If Jackson's hour and a half was all a lie, you would have had no problem doing the same.
Click to expand...
You just didn't like my summation, try to stay in the here and now if its possible, D+. So far Brennan is nailing it, Read was fall down drunk and full of anger. Showing some of TV clips I referenced.
 
gboisjo said:
You just didn't like my summation, try to stay in the here and now if its possible, D+. So far Brennan is nailing it, Read was fall down drunk and full of anger. Showing some of TV clips I referenced.
Click to expand...
Specifically, what did Jackson lie about? You made the claim. If you won't back it up, that's an admission.
 
daeler said:
So glad I am not the only biased person here.

Felt the same way with Brennan, droning, lying, misrepresenting. I had to stop listening as he said a bunch of crap.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, I shut Jackson's close down multiple times, I couldn't take it. I despise the man.
 
gboisjo said:
Totally agree, I shut Jackson's close down multiple times, I couldn't take it. I despise the man.
Click to expand...
Explicit bias. How can you claim you're not biased against Read and for the prosecution?
 
ASHES said:
Trials are not a popularity contest. Your analysis is completely wrong. The evidence is what matters. Given the evidence, plus your opinion of the defense attorneys, it is no surprise you claim otherwise. You would convict Read based simply on her choice of attorney.
Click to expand...
Its not everything, facts do matter, but lawyer's looks and delivery matter as well, to say otherwise is ridiculous. Jackson has a venomous look, it doesn't help him in the eyes of the jury IMO.
 
gboisjo said:
Its not everything, facts do matter, but lawyer's looks and delivery matter as well, to say otherwise is ridiculous. Jackson has a venomous look, it doesn't help him in the eyes of the jury IMO.
Click to expand...
Actually agree with this, it isn't a popularity contest but it does matter how the lawyer looks and how they present everything. Optics is a big part of a trial.

Edit, sorry except the Jackson part, he looks normal to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom