Karen Read Case

[SocksMagoo]

Not another day of you lot having the same argument hahaha. Is this what it's like being in the Jury room?!

Pretty much what a deadlocked jury looks like

 

[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)

 

[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.

 

[Tatvam]

Gosh this is almost uncomfortable to watch. He can't get any redder. This is the same expert that is accusing the defence experts of being unethical and misleading...

 

[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....

 

[karma4klattie]

I reckon they were having a row, she tipped him out of the car outside the house and drove off, backed up fast because she'd come up with a parting shot and, purely by accident, 'clipped him' (her words not mine) causing him to fall backwards and hit his head. If you remember, Natasha Richardson fell skiing and banged her head, one fall, one knock and she died, sadly it can happen.

I'm sure about this. She was telling the first responders she's hit him, and when she and Jennifer McCabe went back to find him she said 'he was exactly where I expected him to be' (again, her words not mine). I'm very sorry for her, I don't believe for a moment she tried to kill him, it was a terrible accident and she should have faced up to it, but she was drunk and muddle headed and only put two and two together as the situation unfolded. Her failure was that having 'clipped him' she didn't go back to see if he was OK because at that point he could well have been saved.

I also don't think Brian Higgins had anything to do with it. In those text messages all I heard was her giving him the come-on and him being cautious and guarded in case she was taking the piss, and him not really believing that she fancied him.

What fascinates me is the arm wounds and the only suggestion I can come up with is that Chloe was put out for a poo, found John on the lawn and attempted to drag him by the arm. Problem with that is the complete lack of Chloe's DNA or hair on John's clothes. Was there any debris on the ground which could have caused those deep scratches?

He was laying on his phone, as can be told by the phone battery temperature records, was he laying on his arm or was it out to the side? Could the snow plough have caused him any hurt (in addition to scattering bits of tail light)? If the snow was so deep it needed ploughing I think it's extremely likely that the body would have been hidden and only looked like banked up snow at that point so I'm not surprised the driver didn't see him.

 

[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 shit because he’s a Boston Cop.
Reasonable doubt.

 

[LondonCalling272]

The timeline? Which one? The new one that comes from the new report from Welcher who changed his mind after the 7th May report from ARCCA or the car data from the Temu expert Burgess who can’t figure out when he actually got his degree and doesn’t know the difference between bits and bytes.

The I hit him 2/3 times change kinda pales insignificance to lying to a grand jury and the FBI.

It wouldn’t matter if it was a Jose or a Janet, anyone relying on a public defender would have been railroaded in this case.
It wasn’t even supposed to be a trial - “If she pleads out it will end, if she fights it it will be an episode” - from the McCabe / Albert group chat before Karen was even arrested.

Like Alessi and other lawyers and judges have said it’s becoming trial by ambush.

 

[minimaz]

I have to say I do find it wild that the prosecutions expert is like these are all the reasons all this phone data that doesn't support our case is incorrect but also the temperature data on the phone is unassailable proof he never went in the house. You can't have it both ways either the phone data is incorrect and subject to manipulation or its not.

 

[Alittlebitofme]

What do you think is the reason the defence went for Alessi? He’s not a criminal attorney.

It doesn’t matter that he’s not a criminal attorney. He has been an amazing addition to the defence team with his tech and pharmaceutical knowledge. He’s not arguing against the police and witnesses he’s going up against the “experts”.

 

[LondonCalling272]

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

 

[Gee_whip]

I think the cop families are shady and not convinced that Karen is guilty but I have a few things that don’t add up - first why wouldn’t she just walk up to the house and confront him for leaving her sitting there? She seemed the type to be ok with that. Why would she just drive away? Also when she picked up the 2 women in the morning to go look for John, she said she watched John walk into the house the night before.. surely the first thing she said to Jennifer was I saw John go into the house so he’s in there. Was she not asking Jen more questions about what happened inside? Why would they drive around looking for him when she saw him going inside? I’d like to know what conversation they had about that.

If he was killed in the house I am trying to see how they arrived at the decision to accuse Karen of running him over. They can’t be sure what witnesses there were to him being dropped off. For all they knew Karen had dashcam footage, or she videoed him going into the house, or she was on the phone to a friend who can vouch for what was going on. If a family of cops killed him surely they’d have other means to dispose of the body rather than leave it on their front lawn? Wouldn’t they have just got rid of the body and said he never turned up. The accusation that he was run over was so needlessly specific.

So many things about it seem corrupt and don’t add up, but a little on both sides I think

 

[evoway13]

If I remember right, John had a cut around one eye which could've resulted from a punch (similar to injuries boxers get) .....but, I have another theory. I think he tripped and fell backwards, hitting his head on the fire hydrant......but, that doesn't explain the scratches on his right arm and no other bruising whatsoever. I seem to remember him having vomit in his underwear. That could've happened if they carried him out of the house ....I'll use this photo as an example

 

[Alfie1234]

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.

You can’t convince on common sense though, you need proof, there is none, there is also massive amount of reasonable doubt because on top of no physical proof that she hit him there are injuries that they can’t explain and never bothered to investigate.

 

[LondonCalling272]

She's guilty.

She's just got good PR and lawyers.

The data from the car - reversing at speed (26mph is fast) and stopping suddenly? How fortunate for those 30 odd people who would have needed to conspire against her to frame her that the data from the car exactly matches a hit and run.

Turtleboy tried to recreate this and couldn't, that key cycle can potentially be the wheels spinning on snow and ice. If you take the ARCCA testimony into account and the wounds on John's arm, it's hard to get it beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[evoway13]

Ally McCabe said 'Colin wasn't at the house when John was there'

Pig DNA in the scratches/teeth marks.

This case is one of those. If you believe it was a cover-up, you have to believe that there are a ton of people who are involved, not just the people at the house that night, but many of the investigators have to be involved in helping in some way. It just doesn't seem plausible to me.

You just need one investigator to enable evidence to go missing and/or reappear. Proctor and another officer saw the cctv footage from the library and the Ring doorbell footage of when Karen arrived back at John's house. Both of those clips have conveniently gone missing

 

[avabella]

Aren’t the American courts wild! We just can’t imagine KCs here speaking to defendants like this - how has America gotten like this?!

 

[Nottonightbabe]

So glad there's a thread on this case!
I watched the majority of the first trial and so far all of this retrial. I'm still a bit undecided...
I think the verdict has to be not guilty purely because of the botched investigation and the sheer amount of reasonable doubt but part of me thinks she did it. I also think something happened at the Alberts that night (maybe unrelated to John O'Keefe) involving Higgins that they were panicked about when the police started investigating that evening..

That's interesting you say that, I've felt the whole time that the whole group are shifty and hiding something, but not necessarily the cover up the defence accused them of. Too much about their behaviour after the incident has been off.

 

[Alittlebitofme]

So basically another day of the commonwealth not able to prove Karen hit him with her SUV

 

[juniperroad]

I've been called for jury duty many times, but never had to sit on a trial. I would be so terrible at this. I'm so bored, and I'm watching it at 1.5 and skipping through half of it. It would be so hard for me to sit still through a full day of this!