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

1691951367971.png

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?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The P read all the emails out loud. I had heard of one and I thought that part was done when I left but apparently not.

Also the D flat out said they did NOT pay these experts. But they did.

Scott says options would be to pull her attorney off and send him packing back to CA. To deny the experts. Or to sanction the attorney. He thinks for reasons that will play into the first two things, it will end up being the third, his guess. Too bad as more is deserved, but the first two would definitely affect trial, that's for sure. I think the experts should be pulled imo. They were hired, paid guns and even told WHAT to say.

Oh Scott has the CLIP from the TRIAL showing her attorney asking the expert if he was paid and the expert says you haven't paid us anything. [Watch them claim that at that point he hadn't been paid yet...] And then Jackson asks him, again this is at trial, and "you don't work for us"? And the expert says that's correct. He also says I've never asked you specific questions before today... Expert says that's correct.

Oh boy, it's all totally proven otherwise.

Well that covers Scott. It's about 1:48 to 9:42 so just about 8 minutes with all this info in the show I linked.

Finished, just sharing the info. I'm definitely watching the six p.m. show. He covers a few in his lives or anything the subscribes want to talk of, but I think it will end up centering on this.
 
So the D attorney is bent basically? OMG will he have to go or what? Does this mean a possible delay? What a F up.

Oh i see you cover what could happen. What a tool her D must be. He had to know that was bent. I think he needs all three. Immediate sanctions for both attorney and experts, send attorney back to CA for consideration of disbarrment, fine both D and expert(s). Maybe even charge them with contempt.

"Scott says options would be to pull her attorney off and send him packing back to CA. To deny the experts. Or to sanction the attorney. He thinks for reasons that will play into the first two things, it will end up being the third, his guess. Too bad as more is deserved, but the first two would definitely affect trial, that's for sure."
 
Last edited:
So the D attorney is bent basically? OMG will he have to go or what? Does this mean a possible delay? What a F up.

Oh i see you cover what could happen. What a tool her D must be. He had to know that was bent. I think he needs all three. Immediate sanctions for both attorney and experts, send attorney back to CA for consideration of disbarrment, fine both D and expert(s). Maybe even charge them with contempt.

"Scott says options would be to pull her attorney off and send him packing back to CA. To deny the experts. Or to sanction the attorney. He thinks for reasons that will play into the first two things, it will end up being the third, his guess. Too bad as more is deserved, but the first two would definitely affect trial, that's for sure."
Scott explained the reasons for his thinking even though they should be employed, the first two options maybe won't be. The first one would affect trial and a new attorney would have to get up to speed. Something in the second one about I forget what it was, it would get dicey with something I think on the order of these experts need to go but they do have to have experts, don't quote me on that one, but I think something on that order.

I watched Scott's later show last night and he played the Read and Jackson interview that was on during Superbowl which I would NEVER have went and watched. I didn't want to see it on his channel either but watched most because he was playing it to point some things out, I eventually couldn't stomach them any longer and left, it certainly was no short interview. It WAS really interesting to hear Jackson (and her) basically call the commonwealth corrupt, etc. after hearing yesterday how corrupt HE IS. I'm sure it struck no one that way just a week or two ago but seeing it after hearing what was heard yesterday makes them look like total liars and hypocrites.

Also of interest is Scott is good to watch because he's fair and he's a defense attorney AND he is one who would have voted her not guilty at the last trial. He said his opinion is changing and now that he knows it was far from a fair trial and that just tells you also how different the jurors would have voted had they KNOWN the experts were not only hired guns but that it was all very unethically discussed and planned out as to answers, etc. that the defense wanted out of their mouths.

This is NOT minor sh*t. And this special prosecutor is GOOD and yet he did not go over the top with it all but he made sure it calmly and respectfully was shown and exposed. There was much aside from this as well, like the trial by ambush and how unfair for witnesses some other things as well. It was NOT a fair trial, and usually that is said on the side of the defendant but not in this case. It was not a fair trial for the P due to the D.

Mark my words, this is NOT going to be the same trial at all.

Scott also said second trials are bad for the D and better for the P. He has done many, many second trials he said. The D gets ONE shot really to try to get their client acquitted and that's their one chance and best chance. The P now knows their defense and their tricks in this case due to the first trial.

Most know I'm not in here much but clearly I do keep up on the case. It isn't my preferred or top case though.

The Read interview was sickening listening to the two of them make her out to be the victim in the case. It was clearly done to influence a future jury pool and the public. And it was clearly evident what a control freak she is.

A lot of my day was on this case yesterday, not something I liked and I had other plans but it was pretty major news and so I wasn't going to not hear what it was all about and more info on it.

He's dirty. Mr, top notch atty is dirty. Slime.

Personally I think it's pretty common with D attorneys. The things that went on in our case should have been shut down as well and the experts were something else, and communications were going on by cell phone from the courtroom to the expert outside the courtroom. Uhm, they were to be sequestered but info was being shared. Seriously. Defense experts also are usually scum. Jmo.

What was done here though was beyond. Isn't it interesting all the fit they had to get things like emails and texts and just LOOK at what has now come out about THEIR emails... SMDH.
 
Scott explained the reasons for his thinking even though they should be employed, the first two options maybe won't be. The first one would affect trial and a new attorney would have to get up to speed. Something in the second one about I forget what it was, it would get dicey with something I think on the order of these experts need to go but they do have to have experts, don't quote me on that one, but I think something on that order.

I watched Scott's later show last night and he played the Read and Jackson interview that was on during Superbowl which I would NEVER have went and watched. I didn't want to see it on his channel either but watched most because he was playing it to point some things out, I eventually couldn't stomach them any longer and left, it certainly was no short interview. It WAS really interesting to hear Jackson (and her) basically call the commonwealth corrupt, etc. after hearing yesterday how corrupt HE IS. I'm sure it struck no one that way just a week or two ago but seeing it after hearing what was heard yesterday makes them look like total liars and hypocrites.

Also of interest is Scott is good to watch because he's fair and he's a defense attorney AND he is one who would have voted her not guilty at the last trial. He said his opinion is changing and now that he knows it was far from a fair trial and that just tells you also how different the jurors would have voted had they KNOWN the experts were not only hired guns but that it was all very unethically discussed and planned out as to answers, etc. that the defense wanted out of their mouths.

This is NOT minor sh*t. And this special prosecutor is GOOD and yet he did not go over the top with it all but he made sure it calmly and respectfully was shown and exposed. There was much aside from this as well, like the trial by ambush and how unfair for witnesses some other things as well. It was NOT a fair trial, and usually that is said on the side of the defendant but not in this case. It was not a fair trial for the P due to the D.

Mark my words, this is NOT going to be the same trial at all.

Scott also said second trials are bad for the D and better for the P. He has done many, many second trials he said. The D gets ONE shot really to try to get their client acquitted and that's their one chance and best chance. The P now knows their defense and their tricks in this case due to the first trial.

Most know I'm not in here much but clearly I do keep up on the case. It isn't my preferred or top case though.

The Read interview was sickening listening to the two of them make her out to be the victim in the case. It was clearly done to influence a future jury pool and the public. And it was clearly evident what a control freak she is.

A lot of my day was on this case yesterday, not something I liked and I had other plans but it was pretty major news and so I wasn't going to not hear what it was all about and more info on it.

He's dirty. Mr, top notch atty is dirty. Slime.

Personally I think it's pretty common with D attorneys. The things that went on in our case should have been shut down as well and the experts were something else, and communications were going on by cell phone from the courtroom to the expert outside the courtroom. Uhm, they were to be sequestered but info was being shared. Seriously. Defense experts also are usually scum. Jmo.

What was done here though was beyond. Isn't it interesting all the fit they had to get things like emails and texts and just LOOK at what has now come out about THEIR emails... SMDH.
Maybe they will take the trial elsewhere. I will have to check the trial date for the Birchmore case as that won't be good for LE by the sounds of it so reasons for D and P to want a venue change for Read maybe?

ETA Birchmore has a status hearing on 15th April and the judge said for them to be thinking of a trial date at that conference. So it could go ahead before the Read trial. I don't know if that would be good or bad for LE.
 
Last edited:
Maybe they will take the trial elsewhere. I will have to check the trial date for the Birchmore case as that won't be good for LE by the sounds of it so reasons for D and P to want a venue change for Read maybe?

ETA Birchmore has a status hearing on 15th April and the judge said for them to be thinking of a trial date at that conference. So it could go ahead before the Read trial. I don't know if that would be good or bad for LE.
IF Read goes off on time, yes that trial will be later.

I think it's a bit late for a change of venue and I don't think anyone has requested one have they? Not sure why what happened yesterday has you thinking that would be a thing? Or did you hear someone motioned for one? I haven't heard of such.
 
IF Read goes off on time, yes that trial will be later.

I think it's a bit late for a change of venue and I don't think anyone has requested one have they? Not sure why what happened yesterday has you thinking that would be a thing? Or did you hear someone motioned for one? I haven't heard of such.
I think i was maybe thinking because it has been so public, they may have difficulty finding a jury this second time around. Like with Delphi they had to get the jury from Wayne County to get jurors who hadn't heard of the case. Also if the Birchmore case goes first it may show the cops in a bad light, i was thinking too.
 
I think i was maybe thinking because it has been so public, they may have difficulty finding a jury this second time around. Like with Delphi they had to get the jury from Wayne County to get jurors who hadn't heard of the case. Also if the Birchmore case goes first it may show the cops in a bad light, i was thinking too.
Yeah, that case proceeding first would make prospective jurors possibly aware of names that may then come up in this one. As far as it being so public, I wouldn't say it is anymore public now than the D made it already previously.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,050
Messages
248,303
Members
992
Latest member
lifeofthespider
Back
Top Bottom