Thread to discuss the Karen Read case, retrial is due to commence today. 
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I personally think it’s a big cover up and she’s innocent.
Just refreshed my memory on this one - looking forward to watching this retrial. I'll do some more detailed reading on the case this evening.
Thanks for setting up the thread!
Thanks for setting up the thread!
I think every single person involved in this trial is shady in some way 
. I think they've all got something to hide. Not necessarily that there's a huge cover-up for murdering JOK, but certainly there's things people involved wanted hidden.
I'm not sure why the state were so determined to pin her for murder, manslaughter surely would have been a more realistic conviction to secure?
. I think they've all got something to hide. Not necessarily that there's a huge cover-up for murdering JOK, but certainly there's things people involved wanted hidden. I'm not sure why the state were so determined to pin her for murder, manslaughter surely would have been a more realistic conviction to secure?
Thanks for setting this up. I'd love a big deep dive into this. I just saw a doctor on tiktok looking at his autopsy and he is saying it's a dog attack? Did anyone come across the dog theory before?
Yes, there's a theory that a fight occurred and the German Shepherd dog living at the address got involved. The dog was rehomed out of state.
I am in two minds, really can’t work it out.
Not suspicious at all
Also just seen that a juror from the first trial is now acting as a lawyer for Karen read for this second trial. Is that legal? Must be. Mad
Yeah apparently it's allowed. The juror was apparently appalled at the state's case against KR and wanted to help out the defence. So the story goes anyway!
I'm in a true crime group, so could probably go back to when this was breaking and read along all the thousands of comments live, but is there any visual of this anywhere? Any deep dive youtube maybe? Was watching something earlier and my sister said this would go against her, that they paid for professionals and didn't disclose it?
Oooh I'm glad there's a thread for this case now. I've been watching since the first trial.
I don't think Karen did herself any favours with the interviews she did but I believe she's innocent. The ARCCA evidence & Dr Renee Stonebridge's testimony along with the what appear to be dog bites on John's arm don't line up with the commonwealth's theory. It's telling they had to bring in someone who is a mob lawyer as a ringer to prosecute the case.
Bev appears to be biased AF- Brennan was whining about ARCCA again today then Alessi explains why they were later on providing that info as it was down to the commonwealth and Bev calls it a deliberate rule 14 violation by the defence.
I hope Karen gets justice as it will also be justice for John but it's an uphill battle with this judge.
I don't think Karen did herself any favours with the interviews she did but I believe she's innocent. The ARCCA evidence & Dr Renee Stonebridge's testimony along with the what appear to be dog bites on John's arm don't line up with the commonwealth's theory. It's telling they had to bring in someone who is a mob lawyer as a ringer to prosecute the case.
Bev appears to be biased AF- Brennan was whining about ARCCA again today then Alessi explains why they were later on providing that info as it was down to the commonwealth and Bev calls it a deliberate rule 14 violation by the defence.
I hope Karen gets justice as it will also be justice for John but it's an uphill battle with this judge.
It wasn't the first time Chloe had bitten someone. I can't remember the name but the lady who was bitten and her ex husband are on the witness list.
She has a broken tail light
The tail light on the passenger side was broken and they found pieces over a number of weeks but another officer from a different police department testified in the first trial that the tail light didn’t look like that when he went to the house.
Just listening to a podcast on this - madness! If her tail light is broken, John's hair is in the tail light, the broken glass is next to John on the ground, then how is that not a cut and dried case?
The officer from the other police department testified that the tail light was cracked with a piece missing but not broken.
Then over time after the incident the police kept finding pieces of tail light on their way home from work - it didn’t make sense to me how they can find 47 pieces if it was just cracked with a small piece missing.
There’s also a. Video of Karen bumping into John’s car with her car in the driveway which could have cracked it.
ARCCA was hired by the FBI to investigate the case and they found that it wasn’t possible for John to have been hit by a car, the judge ruled that the jury weren’t allowed to know who hired ARCCA in the last trial which caused confusion. I think it’s Friday they’re arguing if it’s going to be allowed in this time or not.
Barros’ testimony is in this video like 6 mins in
Love that there is a thread for this, I watched the full trial and now watching the retrial, she is so obviously innocent, there is too much doubt. Both Brian's getting rid of their phones, Michael Proctor is a pig and the judge is a joke!
Alan Jackson is amazing!!
Alan Jackson is amazing!!
- Status