Karen Read Trial - Take 2

[daeler]

Still nothing? So the instructions were they have to go over all the evidence again before they start deliberating?

 

[ASHES]

Still nothing? So the instructions were they have to go over all the evidence again before they start deliberating?

The judge told them not to take any vote until they had examined all the evidence. They can deliberate without going over it all, just not a straw poll or actual vote. Of course, there's no way to enforce that.

 

[gboisjo]

In the first trial the Jurors deliberated for 5 days, twice signaling the court that they were having trouble. After several attempts they told Cannone that they had “fundamental differences in our opinions,” and that “consensus is unattainable.” The judge then declared a mistrial.

Anyone care to venture a guess on how long the jurors will deliberate in trial 2.

Not I, I have been saying for a while, you can never guess how juries will vote.

I think the science says she is innocent. But that is me.

That is so true, at some point on court TV I heard they're correspondent stationed in the courtroom say "the jurors appeared to be on the younger side", If they are its a plus for the defense IMO.

 

[gboisjo]

The judge told them not to take any vote until they had examined all the evidence. They can deliberate without going over it all, just not a straw poll or actual vote. Of course, there's no way to enforce that.

That's right, she's got no business telling them how they should deliberate, that's they're business. Sometimes in trials its as simple as a vote and in 45 minutes its done.

 

[gboisjo]

With so many people convinced one way or the other, I'm thinking a mistrial again. The longer it goes on the more likely it will be IMO.

 

[gboisjo]

You also failed to acknowledge you were wrong about the post I responded to in #2123.

 

[ASHES]

View attachment 67575036

 

[Lees]

Making excuses before the verdict is even in, its exactly what ASHES is doing.

I'm not making excuses. I am declaring how city hall, the police, will do anything they can to protect their own.

And why respond to my post and not what I said. Who determines the final 12 jurors? And you think the State doesn't want certain jurors? You think the State doesn't have a say in the juror selection? So who decides the final 12...the defense?

Again, I read the judge makes sure all is fair. Oh gee, that is a relief. Since she appears to be biased toward the prosecution. So your response is just crowshit.

Lees

 

[daeler]

That is so true, at some point on court TV I heard they're correspondent stationed in the courtroom say "the jurors appeared to be on the younger side", If they are its a plus for the defense IMO.

I was a juror and to me it was obvious the defendant was guilty. There was 3 people that had issues that I thought were unreasonable, part of it was just a different way of thinking part of it was a lack of understanding on how the charges and the law worked.

Still don't know why they ended up agreeing with the rest, we had good arguments but they left one day thinking not guilty and came back thinking guilty.

 

[ASHES]

The only Commonwealth supporter in front of the courthouse, John DePetro, harassing Turtleboy.

 

[ASHES]

A little over 9 hours of deliberations so far.



Will be resuming today shortly. There have been no questions asked by the jury so far.

Not that long when you think about it and all the witnesses there are to go through and reports and cross referencing and all that. I'd love to hear their opinions on Burgess and his fake degree and fraudulent CVs and his changing opinions and blaming everyone else for his own mistakes. Amazing that Aperture was paid some $500,000 for that quality of an expert, where ARCCA cost the defense $22,000 first trial, and $27,000 second trial.

And they are back at it already this morning.

 

[ASHES]

Lawyer You Know doesn't understand why Brennan tells the jury in his closing argument that he chose not to put the 3 giant pieces of taillight from Proctor into evidence.

(Less than 2 minutes)

 

[daeler]

A little over 9 hours of deliberations so far.

View attachment 67575154

Will be resuming today shortly. There have been no questions asked by the jury so far.

Not that long when you think about it and all the witnesses there are to go through and reports and cross referencing and all that. I'd love to hear their opinions on Burgess and his fake degree and fraudulent CVs and his changing opinions and blaming everyone else for his own mistakes. Amazing that Aperture was paid some $500,000 for that quality of an expert, where ARCCA cost the defense $22,000 first trial, and $27,000 second trial.

And they are back at it already this morning.

That is pretty crazy.

Do you think there is a chance of a verdict today?

 

[ASHES]

That is pretty crazy.

Do you think there is a chance of a verdict today?

Of course. They could decide they've looked at enough, and have a vote and reach a verdict if they're unanimous at any time. I expect there to be at least one guilty vote to start though, just based on overall public opinion. If there is, I hope they're reasonable about it and not refusing to look beyond the surface at something like Jennifer McCabe saying "I hit him, I hit him, I hit him."

Heard a funny joke the other day.

We finally got a comment from Chloe.

She said "I bit him, I bit him, I bit him."

 

[gboisjo]

What turned me around in the first trial was when Kerry Roberts, Jen McCabe and Read went looking for O'Keefe early that morning. Read positioned in the backseat of Roberts vehicle still drunk and hysterical. Again, Read in the back seat mostly positioned forward between Roberts and McCabe's heads spots OKeefe with practically zero visibility, covered in a pile of snow, she knew exactly where he was. If anything sinks Read it will be her words and actions that night.

With the exception of the back of O'Keefes head all of his injuries are on one side of body indicative being backed into not beat up.

 

[gboisjo]

Sounds like the jury is confused with the stupid verdict form.

 

[daeler]

What turned me around in the first trial was when Kerry Roberts, Jen McCabe and Read went looking for O'Keefe early that morning. Read positioned in the backseat of Roberts vehicle still drunk and hysterical. Again, Read in the back seat mostly positioned forward between Roberts and McCabe's heads spots OKeefe with practically zero visibility, covered in a pile of snow, she knew exactly where he was. If anything sinks Read it will be her words and actions that night.

With the exception of the back of O'Keefes head all of his injuries are on one side of body indicative being backed into not beat up.

I think the problem with that is the credibility of the witnesses, most of them were caught lying multiple times.

They could have just made up the fact that they could not see him.

That's the problem with their testimony. Is it credible? You think it is, I don't. If we are in a jury I point out the lack of credibility.

 

[daeler]

Sounds like the jury is confused with the stupid verdict form.

Jackson tried to get it fixed, he said it was confusing.

 

[daeler]

Lots of Jury questions on the OUI charge.

 

[ASHES]

I think the problem with that is the credibility of the witnesses, most of them were caught lying multiple times.

They could have just made up the fact that they could not see him.

That's the problem with their testimony. Is it credible? You think it is, I don't. If we are in a jury I point out the lack of credibility.

There's also the video of the intact taillight on the 29th. And the officer who swore it absolutely wasn't like it was later in the sallyport. Saying he should have taken a picture or documented it more is a ridiculous reason to ignore his testimony and the video corroborating it.

The part of the taillight that was illuminated can't be illuminated if the diffuser is broken as it was on Read's taillight, which means the diffuser was broken after the SUV was impounded.

 

[daeler]

Jackson arguing adding "if any" to the instructions and Bev is not having it.

 

[ASHES]

Lots of Jury questions on the OUI charge.

The defense specifically requested it be added this time. It wasn't there last trial.

 

[ASHES]

Jackson arguing adding "if any" to the instructions and Bev is not having it.

Them being confusing is good for the Commonwealth, it let them retry on counts 1 and 3 despite acquittals.

 

[ASHES]

Larry Forman has answers to the jury's questions.

15 minutes

 

[ASHES]

What turned me around in the first trial was when Kerry Roberts, Jen McCabe and Read went looking for O'Keefe early that morning. Read positioned in the backseat of Roberts vehicle still drunk and hysterical. Again, Read in the back seat mostly positioned forward between Roberts and McCabe's heads spots OKeefe with practically zero visibility, covered in a pile of snow, she knew exactly where he was. If anything sinks Read it will be her words and actions that night.

With the exception of the back of O'Keefes head all of his injuries are on one side of body indicative being backed into not beat up.

It is absolutely untrue it was basically zero visibility. Visibility was fine. It was lightly snowing at 6am. You could see from
34 Fairview all the way to Cedarcrest, as evidenced by first responder's dashcams. This blizzard nonsense is just nonsense.

The red line I drew shows how far she would have had to see to see the body. Soon as they got past the cars in the driveway (there were 2 on the right side that morning). The yellow line shows clear visibility as evidenced by dashcam. There was about 2-3 inches of snow.