Karen Read Case

[juniperroad]

I’m not sure I’d call what he did dodgy. Stupid, yes.

Keep in mind we wouldn't know any of this dodgy info if the Dept of Justice didn't get involved. That blew this whole case wide open. None of these texts/shoddy/dodgy info from all these players would be known. Proctor would still be walking around with pats on the back from solving this case.

This is unlike anything we've seen in the US. It just isn't a normal trial at all.

 

[Tatvam]

I don’t think I’d class it as a total shitshow, but regardless, even if a 5 year old carried it out, it doesn’t absolve from basic common sense and whether someone is innocent or not.

I find in some of the Facebook groups the general feeling is ‘shit investigation = innocent’ which just blows my mind.

shit investigation= reasonable doubt= innocent

I've said before that I reckon she could have done it but thankfully the law isn't based around gut feeling, it has to be proven. Which in this case I just don't think they can

 

[Nottonightbabe]

Shall I set up a Lori Daybell thread to discuss her various goings on?

 

[Alfie1234]

Wolfe is a

Wolfe is a paid witness for the defence and was using shady tactics so a

Wolfe is a paid witness for the defence representing a company who have used significantly shady tactics and deliberately kept communications from the prosecution.
Regardless, it’s all a circus because she’s guilty clear as day, so the defence are hanging on with their lives trying to tie everyone up in knots to create distraction and confusion.

I love reading other opinions but not makes me wonder if I’m watching the same trial? That’s not to say you’re wrong and I’m right but it’s amazing how differently we can perceive things and if we are then surely the jury are too?

 

[Tatvam]

I'm not sure I'd call the timings of the calls between Higgins and Albert no big deal, and the fact that they both blatantly lied about them.
There really is no denying that the Alberts were protected during the investigation and I find it a bit insulting to call that smoke and mirrors.

 

[avabella]

I'm obsessed with the Karen read case and Lori daybell case she is something else. But yea I still think Karen did it unintentionally maybe

I listened to a podcast on Lori Daybell but I just cannot get my head around it - *how* does someone sink so deeply into that kind of mindset? It blows my mind. And the thought of what has happened to those children made me stay away from that case altogether.

 

[TapToBoreMeRigid]

I wonder if Alessi's science background played into the decision.

 

[Tatvam]

What I’d really like to know is what do people who think it’s a cover up/she’s innocent think *actually* happened?

We’ve seen lots of timelines of map data, eyewitnesses, phone data etc, but no timelines from anyone that can explain an alternative.

Let’s say Karen dropped John off and he went inside the house (her first story). The group at the Albert’s house would have had no knowledge where Karen went to after that.

How could they have known she wouldn’t come back 10 minutes later? How could they have known she wouldn’t perhaps have gone to a friends house, stayed there all night?

What would have been the *actual* plan, had what we see today not happened? Lay him on the lawn, half dead and what…? Just wait it out? They couldn’t have said he got hit by a plow, Lucky said he didn’t see anyone, and John’s body was too far away from the road to be hit by one.

How did they know to leave John’s phone out in the cold to make sure the temperature reduced in the exact timeframe?

They couldn’t not have known that Karen’s car would be impounded to potentially plant pieces of taillight. They couldn’t have known she’d start screaming about hitting him. They couldn’t have known the car data would show a reverse impact at 24mph. And when the car *did* get impounded, how did they coordinate pieces being taken and dumped at the site, and embedded in John’s T-shirt? (Embedded, not just touched).

How did they get John’s DNA on the pieces of tail light? How did they access his body, with a piece of tail light, rub it in his wounds, with NO ONE knowing this? How did they coordinate this?

And this plan definitely couldn’t have been played out at 1am between a significant group of people.

So, in the absence of the stars aligning and just hanging them the gift of Karen, what do people who think she’s innocent actually think was the plan?

Put simply, it doesn't matter. You're burden shifting. The defence doesn't have to prove anything. The prosecution have to prove what happened beyond all reasonable doubt

 

[Libertine1975]

Just out of interest those who say they think Karen killed John (whether accidental or not) do you think that Richard Allen committed the murders in Delphi?

And those who think Karen is innocent what do you think?

I believe one of the Jurors in the Richard Allen case said it came down to asking "who else could it have been". This was a wider that started and ended (at least) in a public area.

For me, I don't think Richard Allen had a fair trial and have concerns about the confessions but I cannot say I think he is innocent.

I think that Karen Read did hit John but it was accidental or she didn't realise. I wonder of she was so drunk that's why she thought she left in at the Waterfall and had forgotten the trip to Fairview.

Both cases I believe had botched investigations.

 

[juniperroad]

Where are you guys watching the trial? I was using Boston25 on YouTube but it cuts out and doesn’t always let me back to watch if I’ve missed the live.

I watch with Emily D. Baker. She can talk too much, but I like her commentary. She tries to go in and only hear the evidence as the jury is. I wait until later in the day so I can put her at 1.5. She also has a separate channel for just recaps.

 

[Nottonightbabe]

Jen McCabe not waking up her sister and BIL and not going in the house to make sure they were OK given that there was a dead cop on their lawn is just too weird to me. How would she know something didn't also happen to them? That along with neither home owner coming out to see what was going on is just too suspicious for me to get past.

Yeah that is bizarre behaviour. There's suddenly a ton of emergency responders on your lawn and you don't go see what's happening?!

 

[LondonCalling272]

Wow, how does the prosecution go about fixing this disaster? This case just gets crazier and crazier. It is scary to me how many people are good at lying or avoiding the truth. This guy will be lucky to keep his job. I bet his days of being called as an expert are over.

That was so bad Shanon Burgess’ LinkedIn disappeared mid cross

 

[Tatvam]

For people saying that ARRCA are shady, what would be their motivation behind that though?
There's no reason for them to want to testify for the defence over the CWs case in chief. They would have got paid either way!

It really annoys me when the prosecution go in on defence experts getting paid for testimony. Literally every expert the CW have called will be getting paid! A lot of people in that courtroom are getting paid to be there, it doesn't mean bias.

I will be shocked if this trial ends in anything other than a mistrial again, question is if the CW will try a third time?

 

[LadyLockdown]

Just my opinion but I think she was that drunk she didn’t know she’d knocked into him that night. She drove them both to 34 Fairview, they argued as they pulled up, he got out the car and she was mad he did. She did a 3 point turn, knocked him down without realising then drove off as she just assumed he’d gone into the house.
She’s not guilty of murder but she was so drunk she doesn’t realise she’s hit him. There’s no hidden cop conspiracy- she’s gone on record to change her narrative multiple times and she’s suddenly remembered clear details (ie listening to U2 in the car) but it was a terrible drunken accident

I think this is the most plausible - they were all clearly not strangers to drinking and driving.

ETA: there is something totally off about the behaviour of the others though and, for me, that's why the case is so compelling.

 

[Carpediem69]

Wow; ok it seems I am just scratching the surface!

Is it possible that when she’s saying she ‘hit him’ she means punched him?

Not really - there is no question of violence or assault by Karen or John

The ‘Did I hit him, ‘could I have hit him’ ‘I hit him’ (dependent on whose version you hear) seems to have been jumped on by Jen McCabe who said Karen said ‘I hit him, I hit him, I hit him’ directly to her. Then a first responder said Karen asked ‘could I have hit him’.

So considering how distraught she was Karen could have said anything as she was trying to understand what had happened. - plus Kerry Roberts was constantly telling her to ‘shut up’ in the car would not have helped.

you may find a channel called Micro dots helpful - it breaks down various parts of the events into bitesize chunks so you can pick / dip in and out to any areas which interest you. I don’t mind explaining what I know but I am biased towards Karen being totally innocent and this is a massive set up by certain people in the Canton PD IMO. Hope this helps.
Here’s one of them

 

[theGC]

I didn’t watch the first trial but heard a few things about it. I’m watching this one but I haven’t made my mind up yet, I’m going to hold out on my decision until the jury’s sent out to make their mind up too.

also, I wish they’d just explain to us what they think happened to John and why. I feel like they should of started with that, unless that’s just how my mind works

 

[Alittlebitofme]

OJ Simpson did a few interviews. I guess he's innocent too.

Oh Jesus, have a day off

 

[evoway13]

I’m way behind but, Alessi is tormenting this witness like a cat with a half dead mouse …..

 

[cavamom]

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.

Correct. It stores 200 calls. She rolled 200+ calls within a few days of the event. That’s…a lot.

 

[Nottonightbabe]

I agree that is possible that happened.
What I am hung up on are the shady actions of everyone else who was in the house and the god awful investigation.
The unbelievable amount of butt dials, re-homed pets, disposing of phones one day before a preservation order. Evidence stored in solo cups and shopping bags, no chain of custody, red taillight found only after the car had been siezed. Proctor....just everything about him, so bad he was fired because of his actions on this investigation.
Plus, the injuries don't seem to line up with being hit by a car.
If we are to convict someone beyond a reasonable doubt, I don't see how the commonwealth can meet that burden.
For anyone who did not watch the first trial, please listen to Trooper Paul, the commonwealth "expert" on how he says the collision happened

This is the thing for me, I don't necessarily think there was a huge conspiracy like the defence drummed in the last trial, but all of them seem like they're hiding things. All shady AF.