Karen Read accused of backing into boyfriend and leaving him to die *MISTRIAL*

This woman didn't do this. I'd be willing to bet that someone in the house did it. Someone in the house looked up "How long will it take for somebody to die in the cold." Karen couldn't have done that search.

Is there a cover up conspiracy?

 

[Tresir]

I've been adamant that the cops did NO investigation throughout this entire thing. I have no idea how anybody on this thread would say I thought the l they did a good job. Their non job is exactly how I got to seeing how she most likely did not kill him. The making of the purposefully altered video pushed me over the edge even more to something else other than her doing it.

You said (paraphrasing)that when a cop is the victim, they normally go above and beyond in investigating the case. So why did they not do that in this case, in your opinion?

 

[Cousin Dupree]

Is there a list of the party attendees anywhere?

Sort of. Attendees said who was there.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

You said (paraphrasing)that when a cop is the victim, they normally go above and beyond in investigating the case. So why did they not do that in this case, in your opinion?

Because both the assailant and victim are cops.

 

[Guess Who]

Is there a list of the party attendees anywhere?

Would we believe any list they would make?

 

[Guess Who]

You said (paraphrasing)that when a cop is the victim, they normally go above and beyond in investigating the case. So why did they not do that in this case, in your opinion?

Yes, I said in any other case where a cop was killed they would do a thorough investigation. Their lack of any kind of real investigation makes me believe they are covering up something. The manufactured video makes me positive they are covering up something.

 

[Tresir]

Because both the assailant and victim are cops.

Not according to LE. Who is stating that?

 

[Tresir]

Yes, I said in any other case where a cop was killed they would do a thorough investigation. Their lack of any kind of real investigation makes me believe they are covering up something. The manufactured video makes me positive they are covering up something.

Which is the manufactured video? The reversed one of Karen's car?

 

[Tresir]

Would we believe any list they would make?

LE should have done that as part of the investigation, i would have thought. And they should have interviewed them to determine all arrival and departure dates. I am just wondering if it was done. I don't remember it being mentioned.

 

[Guess Who]

Which is the manufactured video? The reversed one of Karen's car?

He. Inverted AND then time stamp added in correct orientation. NOT just simply reversed video. Reversed video would also have reversed time stamps.

 

[Guess Who]

LE should have done that as part of the investigation, i would have thought. And they should have interviewed them to determine all arrival and departure dates. I am just wondering if it was done. I don't remember it being mentioned.

We would have thought they would investigate all that they did not investigate. They didn't even try and that by itself makes me leery of that little they did do

Evidently the FBI agrees.

 

[Tresir]

Good pic of the house and the steps in this article from last month.

Also the flagpole in the centre and the fire hydrant bottom left.

Things to know about the Karen Read murder case, which could go to a retrial

Prosecutors in Massachusetts say they plan to retry Karen Read for the death of her Boston police officer boyfriend

www.opb.org

Michael Coyne, the dean at the Massachusetts School of Law, said he found it “curious” that jurors never indicated they had reached a verdict on some of the counts — if indeed they had. “That is the unusual part — If in fact they had reached consensus on some, why didn't they report it to the court?"

Since the jurors left the verdict forms blank, Coyne expects prosecutors to make the case that they “didn't reach consensus on anything," he said.

FILE - An empty flagpole is seen outside the residence where the body of John O'Keefe, a Boston police officer, was found on Jan. 29, 2022, outside the home, Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Canton, Mass. A judge declared a mistrial Monday, July 1, 2024, after jurors deadlocked in the case of Karen Read, who was accused of killing her boyfriend, O'Keefe, by striking him with her SUV and leaving him in a snowstorm. Prosecutors said in a statement that they intend to retry the case.

Charles Krupa / AP

Juror secrecy, for now​

The jurors' identities have not been released yet, and none are believed to have spoken with the media. A week after declaring the mistrial, Cannone ordered a 10-day hold on naming them publicly, citing “a risk of immediate and irreparable injury should the list be made available to the public at this time.” She noted that people surrounding the case had been charged with intimidation. The ruling aims to protect the jurors’ privacy if they want to remain anonymous, but doesn’t prevent them from volunteering to speak publicly.

More at link

 

[Tresir]

Because both the assailant and victim are cops.

AFAIK the self confessed 'assailant' is bRead. Have you got a link from LE or MSM that shows a cop was the assailant?

 

[Tresir]

We would have thought they would investigate all that they did not investigate. They didn't even try and that by itself makes me leery of that little they did do

Evidently the FBI agrees.

So that's a no? Did they interview party attendees? Surely they must have to determine whether he went in the house.

I would believe it if both LE and the P did the list. Surely that is one of the first things to do.

 

[Guess Who]

So that's a no? Did they interview party attendees? Surely they must have to determine whether he went in the house.

I would believe it if both LE and the P did the list. Surely that is one of the first things to do.

Like I've stated multiples times, there is absolutely no record of her uttering those words until about the time of the grand jury inquest over a year later. Of they did actual witness interviews and that actually happened, wouldn't that be a very important thing to have in at least one of those interviews? Wouldn't those witnesses be wanting to make sure that was in their interview? It's nowhere.
In trial, the defense kept asking the officers if they did the most basic things and the answer 99% of the time was a resounding "no".

 

[Tresir]

Like I've stated multiples times, there is absolutely no record of her uttering those words until about the time of the grand jury inquest over a year later. Of they did actual witness interviews and that actually happened, wouldn't that be a very important thing to have in at least one of those interviews? Wouldn't those witnesses be wanting to make sure that was in their interview? It's nowhere.
In trial, the defense kept asking the officers if they did the most basic things and the answer 99% of the time was a resounding "no".

I think the most important and obvious thing would be a list of attendees at the party with their arrival and departure date and times.

Next thing would be all their interview records.

Third thing would be the initial arrival and departure times of bRead and then later her and her companions' arrival and departure times - ie when she found Okeefe on the front lawn, plus arrival and departure times of all other witnesses/medics/ LE thereafter etc.

That would be just the first step IMO. If that wasnt done, then that is a big problem from the very beginning.

 

[Guess Who]

I think the most important and obvious thing would be a list of attendees at the party with their arrival and departure date and times.

Next thing would be all their interview records.

Third thing would be the initial arrival and departure times of bRead and then later her and her companions' arrival and departure times - ie when she found Okeefe on the front lawn, plus arrival and departure times of all other witnesses/medics/ LE thereafter etc.

That would be just the first step IMO. If that wasnt done, then that is a big problem from the very beginning.

One would think these would be the first things done but it appears none of those most basic things made it into any report and when some most basic operations questions were asked of the officers, most were said to not have been done. Now, add the purposefully altered video and they were asked specifically if it was a true representation and that nobody was near the taillight in question and they lied on the stand about it. That is all I need for reasonable doubt.

Too bad for JOK that we'll never be able to know what actually happened because of their shoddy and fraudulent work.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

AFAIK the self confessed 'assailant' is bRead. Have you got a link from LE or MSM that shows a cop was the assailant?

No, because the cops didn't even investigate that possibility. It seems they only wanted one outcome.

 

[Guess Who]

AFAIK the self confessed 'assailant' is bRead. Have you got a link from LE or MSM that shows a cop was the assailant?

If she confessed, especially with that many people supposedly hearing it, why is it not documented at the time? It appears exactly ZERO times in any report.

 

[Tresir]

One would think these would be the first things done but it appears none of those most basic things made it into any report and when some most basic operations questions were asked of the officers, most were said to not have been done. Now, add the purposefully altered video and they were asked specifically if it was a true representation and that nobody was near the taillight in question and they lied on the stand about it. That is all I need for reasonable doubt.

Too bad for JOK that we'll never be able to know what actually happened because of their shoddy and fraudulent work.

Well they are getting a do over right? So they can get it right this time hopefully. If they don't, then they have to expect the same result or even an acquittal.

 

[Tresir]

If she confessed, especially with that many people supposedly hearing it, why is it not documented at the time? It appears exactly ZERO times in any report.

I think it probably was by the emergency services and those who heard her afterwards, like JO's niece, for instance. I wonder if it is any of her texts? Did they publish her texts? I know i have heard about a couple like the 'where r u you? U pervert JO."

We can watch for these things in the retrial.