• 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 (3 Viewers)

Oh dear. Brennan doesn't realize, but he's just lost. He's trying to tell a consistent story about where Read's SUV was when it was parked in front of 34 Fairview, when the Commonwealth witnesses don't even agree on what cars even were there, which direction she was facing, and whether the SUV moved at any point.
 
Amazing the way he describes O'Keefe being left "on the corner of Fairview" and not"in the yard of 34 Fairview" where he was actually found. His numbers about how fast and far she reversed are also all over the place and different than the first trial.
 
He's fudging up all the times stuff happens at, because he's trying to sync the Lexus computer with Waze cell data but the Waze time is off by 3 minutes and he isn't accounting for that.
 
Trials are always fun, thanks for the updates and commentary.
 
Defense opening statement now. Alan Jackson giving the "a car never hit O'Keefe" treatment. Makes sense, unlike everything the prosecution said. For example, if she had confessed to everybody she hit him, where is the vehicle accident report? There isn't one. It's all made up after the fact.
 
Produces a text from the now fired lead investigator Proctor to one of his buddies at the beginning of the investigation,
Buddy:n"Is he (the homeowner where the body was found) gonna catch any shit?" To which Proctor responds: "No. He's a Boston cop too."
 
Defense says their medical expert will testify that O'Keefe did not suffer from hypothermia or cold related injuries to his organs, and that the head injury was immediately incapacitating. Also that more evidence and witnesses will confirm he went inside the house.
 
Both openings done, short recess then the Commonwealth begins with their witnesses.
 
First witness for the Commonwealth is one of the paramedics. Last time he said she confessed (I hit him) but he didn't tell anyone or put it in any report,and also said that O'Keefe was wearing a puffy jacket, which he wasn't.
 
On cross, defense has caught him changing his testimony from the last trial and previous grand jury testimony, where he said she said I hit him twice, now he says it's 3 times to match the other witnesses, after talking to Brennan and Tully 3 times in the last 3 weeks, including last night.
 
Last edited:
Jackson is nailing him on the previous puffy jacket testimony, because he testified at the last trial he was as sure O'Keefe was wearing the puffy jacket as he was all his other facts, including "I hit him" (twice, not three times yet), so how can his memory be relied upon for anything since there were no 2 layers under a puffy jacket, or a puffy jacket.
 
Jackson now has him changing his testimony from a few minutes ago, when he said all he talked about with Brennan and Tully was how many times he remembers Read saying "I hit him." Now he says they also talked about what he meant by appropriate winter clothing, and the non-existent puffy jacket.
 
"To be perfectly honest sir, I did not remember until right now"


"So your memory is fading even after just 3 weeks"

"Yes sir."
1745342274107.png


😆
 
Now defense has him testifying he can't answer a question, even though he had no problem answering it at the first trial, about whether the injuries were consistent with a physical fight (which he said they were at the last trial.) They're arguing about it in sidebar.
 
They went for lunch after the sidebar so don't know what was decided. They're supposed to be back from lunch half an hour ago but still not back.

Eta: back to the cross.
 
Originally told trooper Proctor that he had overhead Read say "I hit him", one time, to another female emt, not 2 or 3 times, in response to his question.
 
Also doesn't remember ever telling Proctor that Read was praying over O'Keefe, but that's what is in the report that he said.
 
After a short redirect, on recross he is shown the video at the scene and how it shows his story about how he heard her confess wasn't possible. He's now claiming he sees Read in the video when she isn't in it, and judge won't let defense play the video back again to prove him wrong.
 
Judge asks "can we wrap this up" as the defense is demolishing this witness's credibility. It is completely inappropriate for her to do, this is the first witness, it's going to be a long trial regardless, and she never does this to the prosecution.
 
To further impeach this witness, he is asked where the black eye on O'Keefe was located, as well as a knot on his forehead. He admitted they were on the left side, after previously testifying several minutes before during redirect that all of O'Keefe's injuries were on the right side of his body.
 
"Did he have any injuries to the left side of his face?"

"No"

"Did he have a black left eye?"

"Yes"

🙃
 
On reredirect, Brennan puts words in his mouth, by asking him "when you heard her say I hit him to other people, who did she say it to" when he never testified to any such thing. There was a sidebar and defense objection looks to have been overruled. On recross, he is questioned about his newfound memories in relation to questions asked by the Commonwealth regarding him now having heard her say "I hit him" not only once as he first said, or twice as he testified at the first trial, or 3 times as he testified earlier today, but now an unspecified number of more times.
 
He remembers "hearing it in the background several other times" even though this is the first time it's ever been mentioned, when he was asked that leading question from Brennan.

Says the reason he never said anything was because he was never asked.

Holy crap, did he forget already that the first time he said he heard it, was when he overhead it said once to someone else?
 
This is how it's going to be for most Commonwealth witnesses. Confronted with their obvious lies and ever changing testimony. Kerry Roberts is the next witness (I'm still over 30 minutes behind) and she is going to face her own challenges with the truth and how they conflict with video and other concrete evidence.
 
Let me reiterate. The first witness from the state, has given his story at minimum, 5 times. Mostly under oath. And it has changed each time. Where is there anything but reasonable doubt?



Debriefing at the hospital

Proctor interview

State grand jury

Federal grand jury

First trial

Second trial

Different every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ASHES
Total: 4 (members: 1, guests: 3)
Back
Top Bottom