Karen Read Trial
- Thread starter POTUS
- Start date
Read, a former adjunct professor at Bentley College, is charged with second-degree murder of her Boston police officer boyfriend, which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison, along with manslaughter while operating under the influence of alcohol, and leaving a scene of personal injury and death.
Using the OJ defense: there are other police officers trying to frame her.
www.nbcnews.com
Using the OJ defense: there are other police officers trying to frame her.
What to know on the Karen Read murder trial as the jury deliberates her verdict
The 44-year-old woman has claimed innocence and alleges that law enforcement officers are trying to frame her in John O'Keefe's death.
www.nbcnews.com
Her eyes and blonde highlights tell me she did it.
All women are crazy, it’s just a matter of when and for how long.
From watching a series of Datelines through the years, this is about all that's required to convict a spouse.
It might hit back!
I convinced she's innocent. When you dig down into the facts, there is SO MUCH smoke around the folks at that party. People destroying their phones and sim cards in separate places. Re-housing, or likely killing, their dog. Re-flooring their basement. The lead investigator is basically best friends with the owners of the house and never even looked their way. Literally nothing presented in the trial confirms the prosecution's theory.
Dammit, I've been avoiding this rabbit hole, but your gonna make me sink into the depths of this cesspool.
She has “the look.” My father taught me about this. It took years to develop the skill to quickly identify the look and then avoid the crazy. I’m trying to teach my sons but I fear they won’t get it in time.
Probably not, once they look down it’s over. Anything you tau them will go right out the window.
Yeah, the problem is that "the look" that could get you killed is really similar to "the look" that says "I like ta 17".
In fact, they're often exactly the same look in the really dangerous succubi.
Wonder how long it will take for the Netflix Doc to come out. I may just wait for that so I don’t have to read much.
Id
I'd be hesitant since it hits back. With SUV's.
Vehicle shows it went 24 mph in reverse for 60 feet with victim's blood and hair found on the broken tail light. Blunt force trauma to head and hypothermia the cause of death. She was out riding around looking for him after midnight and had her girlfriends helping in the search (no rescue intent). When women are on the prowl like that nothing good follows.
I think she was drunk. Fighting with him. And ran over him. Maybe on accident but who backs up 24 mph.
I think we really need to do away with trial by a jury of your peers. We need to change trials to a jury of 3 judges.
There is so much evidence now with electronic devices and elements of the criminal statutes and jury instructions are complicated. It takes a legal experience to sift through the minutiae. Then there is so much misinformation with social media. People think reality is an episode of CSI. People will ignore direct evidence and focus on circumstantial defense theories that may or may not have anything to do with a case.
OJ did it. Flowers did it. This lady did it.
I think we really need to do away with trial by a jury of your peers. We need to change trials to a jury of 3 judges.
There is so much evidence now with electronic devices and elements of the criminal statutes and jury instructions are complicated. It takes a legal experience to sift through the minutiae. Then there is so much misinformation with social media. People think reality is an episode of CSI. People will ignore direct evidence and focus on circumstantial defense theories that may or may not have anything to do with a case.
OJ did it. Flowers did it. This lady did it.
There are several factual errors in your post. None of his blood was on the vehicle. None. They did find his DNA on a vehicle he rode in and drove. But not DNA from blood. Every medical examiner has testified that his injuries do not look like a pedestrian strike. He was found in snow and grass, with nothing to cause blunt force trauma to head. The prosecution’s own accident recreation person testified the car could not have hit his head, but his arm only. She didn’t go looking for him until early morning (5:00ish AM) so basically you got almost everything wrong.
They tried to recreate the back up and they couldn’t get the car above 19 miles an hour backing up from where she was. The recreators also said going 19 in reverse felt reckless and exceedingly fast that it would be very hard to control the car like that.
Where are you getting this information regarding the testimony?
See. One piece of technology that says this, another "expert" testifies its that. Because they recreated it and that has to be exactly* how it went down. Now we disregard technology in this situation but not the other.
Fact is she was backing swiftly. His dna on the bumper. His drink. Scratches from the glass.
Last edited:
You reading what I'm reading? I was paraphrasing and went and checked it was hair DNA found on HER broken tail light AND pieces of said tail light found at crime scene. Sorry about the hair / blood thing.
What to know on the Karen Read murder trial as the jury deliberates her verdict
The 44-year-old woman has claimed innocence and alleges that law enforcement officers are trying to frame her in John O'Keefe's death.
www.nbcnews.com
The key cycle that indicated the car was backing up swiftly was the tow truck impounding the vehicle. This was also verified by experts. So in fact, she was not backing up swiftly at all. Not to mention that the way Lexus determines speed is by axle rotation so if you spin out at all in the snow the vehicle will log fast speeds when you didn’t move at all.
The pieces of tail light were found on top of the snow days after accident when it had snowed several inches. They were not found on the initial search. The cops had custody of the car unchecked for several hours. When they showed the jury the video in the Sally port of them impounding the car, they flipped the image without telling the jury that it was doctored. Driver gets out of the wrong side of car. All this suspect behavior is just the tip of the iceberg. These dudes tried to pin this on her.You reading what I'm reading? I was paraphrasing and went and checked it was hair DNA found on HER broken tail light AND pieces of said tail light found at crime scene. Sorry about the hair / blood thing.
What to know on the Karen Read murder trial as the jury deliberates her verdict
The 44-year-old woman has claimed innocence and alleges that law enforcement officers are trying to frame her in John O'Keefe's death.
Your previous reply to my post was BS. He was found on a snowy morning. Vehicle data shows at 12:45 A.M. her SUV was at the scene and went 20 mph in reverse. Now you're going OJ. Lemme guess, you don't think he did it either?
Last edited:
I got a speech from my dad when i bought A ring for my girlfriend at the time. “I get it, I’m a male too but you’re playing with a diesel fire and you damn sure ain’t a fireman”. Was great advice, I never even worry about my wife killing me in my sleep
I been saying the same stuff about OJ for decades…. Thing is, did you know while he was driving around in that FORD Bronco he hired a lawyer? Not for himself but for his son. He hired one for his son before he got one for himself. That make sense?
One other thing, his son had a history of violence and lots of other things. Did OJ do it or did he cover up his son doing it?
If it was a frame job, it would have to include most of a police department. Come on.
You clearly haven’t been following the trial. Go listen to the key cycle testimony. Reading one synopsis is not the same as listening to the actual testimony. The fact that you’d compare this to OJ is hilarious. DNA clearly indicated OJ did it. The people didn’t trust the science or were racially motivated or both.
In this trial, every single expert, including a federal investigator from the FBI, have testified that the injuries he received do not line up with a vehicle strike. The PhD in Physics and an expert in crime scene reconstruction said explicitly, the prosecutions theory of how he ended up where he is does not hold water.
They never even investigated anyone at the party. They didn’t even interview them or ask to search the house. They decided she did it, then they only looked at evidence (or created evidence) that fit that narrative.
imagine a police officer is found dead with clear dog bite marks on his arm and not only do they never even look at the owners of a dog from the house he died in front of, when said owners randomly re-home the dog out of state soon after the crime, no one is the least bit curious as to why? When two of the folks there the night of the incident destroy their cell phone and SIM cards, we should just take their word for it that they needed to do that.
when someone at the party googles at 2:30 AM, while Karen Read is at home asleep, “how long to die in cold”, that’s just a coincidence and again, nothing to see here.
They just assumed that the cops and their relatives at that party couldn’t have had anything to do with it.
All of the conclusive DNA evidence points to OJ, not his son (who is not his clone and does not share his DNA)
Because the State Police investigated the case. The State police interviewed Alberts.
It is the defense expert that said he had dog bites. The medical examiner said Blunt force.
The defense incorrectly analyzed data saying the Google was at 230am. McCabe gave testimony that she googled that at 5am when Read asked her to Google it.
Just watch these two videos and you tell me who seems like they know what they're talking about and who doesn't
The prosecution's "expert"
Dr. David Wolfe, crash reconstruction expert
