Karen Read Case

[Nottonightbabe]

Lori Vallow Daybell

Thread to discuss events past and present concerning Lori 🙂 Who watched the last trial? The cheek of the woman to get snippy and jealous at the witness that went on a date with Charles! Brass neck like no other.

tattle.life

All done

 

[avabella]

Data doesn’t lie. There was no time for him to be in the house/get beat up/trip and fall/get eaten by a dog/whatever else.

 

[TapToBoreMeRigid]

Was there enough time for her to get in and connect to John's WiFi?

 

[avabella]

Was there enough time for her to get in and connect to John's WiFi?

Trigger event on car was 12:31. Last known movement on Johns phone was 12.32. She connected at close to 12.37. WiFi can stretch to the kerb I would guess.
Google suggests a 7 minute drive, I’m assuming that’s adhering to all speed limits. People on YouTube have done the drive in less time.

 

[karma4klattie]

Trigger event on car was 12:31. Last known movement on Johns phone was 12.32. She connected at close to 12.37. WiFi can stretch to the kerb I would guess.
Google suggests a 7 minute drive, I’m assuming that’s adhering to all speed limits. People on YouTube have done the drive in less time.

Two men from Court TV followed the exact route at the exact legal speed, they had to stop at two red lights and the trip took more than 6 minutes, however, one of the talking heads in the studio reckoned KR was probably gunning it and may have jumped any lights as it was dark and there were no other cars on the road.
They also checked out Whiffin's 3 hills which he'd interpreted as flights of stairs in court, and found no rises at all got registered on their iphones.

 

[LondonCalling272]

Except they’ve changed the timeline 4 times now and this latest change was to make it fit Whiffin’s testimony.

ARCCA’s new report with testing, experiments and video was provided on May 7th.
Aperture changed their theory on May 8th.

They’ve had the times as
12:45
12:30
12:31:38
Now 12:32:16 to fit Whiffen’s testimony re last phone usage. If this was the other way around it wouldn’t be allowed in.

 

[avabella]

Except they’ve changed the timeline 4 times now and this latest change was to make it fit Whiffin’s testimony.

ARCCA’s new report with testing, experiments and video was provided on May 7th.
Aperture changed their theory on May 8th.

They’ve had the times as
12:45
12:30
12:31:38
Now 12:32:16 to fit Whiffen’s testimony re last phone usage. If this was the other way around it wouldn’t be allowed in.

It’s not ‘changed’ - they could literally just go ‘oh actually we’re gonna change it’ - new experts and new methods mean improved testing - plus the recovered data from the car that wasn’t available previously.

The ARCCA witness last time testified when crossed by Lally that John could have sustained injuries by a reversing vehicle clipping him. But that information gets conveniently forgotten about, plus the deleted and disappearing messages via Signal. They’re not exactly squeaky clean.

I don’t know how anyone can get past the pieces of glass and plastic in Johns T-shirt, coupled with everything else.

It’s interesting that *everyone* else’s information and evidence is incorrect, except the actual defendants, who changed her story multiple times (perhaps after calling daddy at 1.30am?!), and pretty much blabbed the actual scenario that happened all over tv.

 

[avabella]

Two men from Court TV followed the exact route at the exact legal speed, they had to stop at two red lights and the trip took more than 6 minutes, however, one of the talking heads in the studio reckoned KR was probably gunning it and may have jumped any lights as it was dark and there were no other cars on the road.
They also checked out Whiffin's 3 hills which he'd interpreted as flights of stairs in court, and found no rises at all got registered on their iphones.

Apple health data on iPhones is junk, I’d disregard most of that evidence right off the bat.

 

[LondonCalling272]

It’s not ‘changed’ - they could literally just go ‘oh actually we’re gonna change it’ - new experts and new methods mean improved testing - plus the recovered data from the car that wasn’t available previously.

The ARCCA witness last time testified when crossed by Lally that John could have sustained injuries by a reversing vehicle clipping him. But that information gets conveniently forgotten about, plus the deleted and disappearing messages via Signal. They’re not exactly squeaky clean.

I don’t know how anyone can get past the pieces of glass and plastic in Johns T-shirt, coupled with everything else.

It’s interesting that *everyone* else’s information and evidence is incorrect, except the actual defendants, who changed her story multiple times (perhaps after calling daddy at 1.30am?!), and pretty much blabbed the actual scenario that happened all over tv.

The Commonwealth’s theory has changed multiple times. Look at Trooper Paul’s testimony from the first trial.
As for the plastic and glass, John’s clothing was in Trooper Proctor’s car for weeks. Trooper Proctor who was adamant it was Karen from the get go and Brian Albert wouldn’t catch any tit because he’s a Boston Cop.
Reasonable doubt.

 

[avabella]

The Commonwealth’s theory has changed multiple times. Look at Trooper Paul’s testimony from the first trial.
As for the plastic and glass, John’s clothing was in Trooper Proctor’s car for weeks. Trooper Proctor who was adamant it was Karen from the get go and Brian Albert wouldn’t catch any tit because he’s a Boston Cop.
Reasonable doubt.

The theory has never changed from the CW. It’s always been ‘Karen hit him’. If anything it’s the defences theory that is so ambiguous it’s almost laughable. They can’t offer a 3rd party culpability because there’s 0 evidence so they dance around Michael Proctor and how evidence was collected, but without giving an actual alternative theory as to how John died.
Again, reasonable doubt does not mean innocence and that’s the real tragedy here.

 

[LondonCalling272]

The theory has never changed from the CW. It’s always been ‘Karen hit him’. If anything it’s the defences theory that is so ambiguous it’s almost laughable. They can’t offer a 3rd party culpability because there’s 0 evidence so they dance around Michael Proctor and how evidence was collected, but without giving an actual alternative theory as to how John died.
Again, reasonable doubt does not mean innocence and that’s the real tragedy here.

I never said they changed their theory being that she hit him?

They have changed their timeline 4 times. Each time it gets disproven they move the goalposts.
It’s not actually the defence’s job to give an alternate theory to how John died, the onus is only on them to prove it wasn’t Karen.

I’m not saying it means she’s innocent, that’s subjective and down to personal opinion but as it stands the commonwealth need to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt and their timeline was shot they then came back and changed the timeline yet again.

Evidence is supposed to be collected, logged and stored to avoid tampering. There’s no proper chain of custody when something is kicking around his car for weeks and could easily have been tampered with.
The Deighton police officer, Nicholas Barros testified that the tail light was cracked with one small piece missing and that was after John was alleged to have been hit.

Multiple witnesses from the CW have now perjured themselves, Jen McCabe lied to the grand jury, lied to the FBI, deleted hundreds of calls. Brian Albert butt dialled Brian Higgins who butt dialled him right back just minutes before the “hos long to die in cold” search at 2:27, all of them had butt dials between each other yet none of the butt dials had voicemails.
There’s something dodgy going on in all of it.

 

[evoway13]

Jen McCabe might be called back to be cross examined again - as she said she saw the car at 00.45hrs

All the evidence re: John's phone can't be relied on. He could've dropped the phone at 00.32 hrs on the front lawn (or thrown it) and then made it inside Fairview. We don't know what went on from 00.32hrs until his body was discovered hours later. Jen McCabe called John's phone seven times - she deleted all but one call. I'm assuming they were all looking for John's phone and Jen decided to call it. Brian Albert's home was apparently soundproof so, they didn't hear John's phone outside....(heavy sarcasm)

 

[evoway13]

What I'm saying is, John could've been beaten up at 1.00am and then carried outside......There's no evidence to suggest he wasn't......and there's no evidence to suggest he was hit by a car....

 

[Tatvam]

Did anyone hear the Judges warning to the jurors first thing yesterday about facial expressions?

Apparently it was because a couple of jurors were notable laughing at the cross examination over evidence collecting in red solo cups!

 

[Libertine1975]

Jen McCabe might be called back to be cross examined again - as she said she saw the car at 00.45hrs

All the evidence re: John's phone can't be relied on. He could've dropped the phone at 00.32 hrs on the front lawn (or thrown it) and then made it inside Fairview. We don't know what went on from 00.32hrs until his body was discovered hours later. Jen McCabe called John's phone seven times - she deleted all but one call. I'm assuming they were all looking for John's phone and Jen decided to call it. Brian Albert's home was apparently soundproof so, they didn't hear John's phone outside....(heavy sarcasm)

I thought the evidence was that she didn't delete calls but she made so many calls before her phone was handed to the police to review the calls were removed from her phone log as there was no space for them.

 

[avabella]

Jen McCabe might be called back to be cross examined again - as she said she saw the car at 00.45hrs

All the evidence re: John's phone can't be relied on. He could've dropped the phone at 00.32 hrs on the front lawn (or thrown it) and then made it inside Fairview. We don't know what went on from 00.32hrs until his body was discovered hours later. Jen McCabe called John's phone seven times - she deleted all but one call. I'm assuming they were all looking for John's phone and Jen decided to call it. Brian Albert's home was apparently soundproof so, they didn't hear John's phone outside....(heavy sarcasm)

So if we take Jen McCabe saying she saw the car at 12.45am then we can take from that that either;

- she’s incredibly stupid and has lied about seeing Karen’s car at 12.45, with no way of knowing where or who Karen was with (therefore easily debunking her time. This would be a massive risk to take as no one had any way of knowing where Karen was at that point).

- we know she *couldn’t* have seen the car at 12.45 because Karen’s car was at Johns house.

- so common sense and the most likely explanation is that she’s mistaken on her timings. This was a random night where I doubt anyone is really looking closely at their phones/watches while having a good time with their friends.

The whole ‘been beaten up’ story is just baffling. Firstly, why? Why would they? And secondly, a bunch of cops are going to put him outside on the front lawn? When there’s masses of woodland out the back?

 

[Libertine1975]

So if we take Jen McCabe saying she saw the car at 12.45am then we can take from that that either;

- she’s incredibly stupid and has lied about seeing Karen’s car at 12.45, with no way of knowing where or who Karen was with (therefore easily debunking her time. This would be a massive risk to take as no one had any way of knowing where Karen was at that point).

- we know she *couldn’t* have seen the car at 12.45 because Karen’s car was at Johns house.

- so common sense and the most likely explanation is that she’s mistaken on her timings. This was a random night where I doubt anyone is really looking closely at their phones/watches while having a good time with their friends.

The whole ‘been beaten up’ story is just baffling. Firstly, why? Why would they? And secondly, a bunch of cops are going to put him outside on the front lawn? When there’s masses of woodland out the back?

The main argument against the he was beaten in the house and left outside theory is simple to me. That is why would you leave your victim on your own front lawn? Surely you'd leave them down the road somewhere or as you say in the woods.

 

[LondonCalling272]

I thought the evidence was that she didn't delete calls but she made so many calls before her phone was handed to the police to review the calls were removed from her phone log as there was no space for them.

There were calls in her call log and then deleted calls that were recovered but there was also a third category of deleted calls that were only recovered because of access to John’s call history. The third category calls included calls made to John between 12:14 and 12:50.

 

[avabella]

The main argument against the he was beaten in the house and left outside theory is simple to me. That is why would you leave your victim on your own front lawn? Surely you'd leave them down the road somewhere or as you say in the woods.

This is a small town where I could safely make the assumption that ‘everyone knows everyone’ kind of place. John was well known and well liked. He and his family had suffered immeasurable tragedy and he took on his niece and nephew to raise them.
I find the whole ‘he was taken indoors and beaten to death’ really disrespectful of his life and legacy.

It was Karen who was disliked, not John.

 

[Tatvam]

Yeah I kind of agree, but then the defence doesn't have to prove the third party culprit theory.
I actually think the prosecutions strategy this trial (not calling all the Alberts, Mccabes and everyone at the party) has helped the defence because they aren't focusing as much on the third party culprit and more reasonable doubt over the shoddy investigation