My take on the light. I don't have the insight into the entire case however. The taillight being broken. From what I understand. There were not fragments at the scene. But I remember pieces being fit exactly together. So that didn't make cheese. And complete contradiction.And I also recall, If she hit something, There would be evidence on her taillight. Fibers, Animal hair, Etc. There wasn't. This is from my best recollection.
I remember hearing something like that, however, I think there is a good argument and basis on the reverse side but of course I don't recall what all it was. Of course I don't. Story of my life these days. I think I have stuffed in too many cases for far too long and no info sticks in any more as I try to retain the ones that are in there and more long term of mine like Morphew, Daybell, etc. and even those have so much info, it spills over and I forget some over time lol.
I also THINK it has been said that the TV show on this has a lot of falsehoods which hasn't helped anything.
I sure don't know but it's a tough one.
One thing that bothers me and I think is big is if I have it right, this entire story only came about later and when she found she was going to be charged so seriously, etc. Right? Initially she believed she did hit him. This is a huge red flag to me and where was all this other info and story then?
Good point about the fibers, is that a fact that there were none? I can say I know this to be true at least with like deer hits. I worked in insurance related and many a company was told the insured was lying as there will be deer hair and there are ways to tell but that's a big one. I won't share them all as there's enough fraud lol but it is true. I am not as SURE on a low speed impact of a clothed human. A deer is hair overall and on the outside of the body. We never had someone hit a garage door and lie and say they hit a human instead lol so I don't know.
Did you watch the STS show on this one that I put up awhile back? It is NOT dull. Very feisty with good arguments on both sides from the guests. It is a tough one because both sides of it can be argued pretty darned well. There was a woman on it that was irritating as all get out as she wouldn't shut up and let the other guests speak at times but even with that, it was quite interesting and she did have good points.
In the end, I felt Read to be guilty after a good debate of all on both sides and hearing it all. I do think they are making an example of her and overcharging. I'm not saying that's the right take or position but on listening to it all, I did think she hit him and the facts fit with the prosecution and the defense story doesn't cut it and again came later when needed. BUT it is a good one and one that people can buy of police parties, corruption, special treatment, framing, etc. A juror or two or even more may buy it. Especially with the fact there are some things that add to it. For one, she and her partner were engaging in such and she is/was guilty of a DUI herself that night.
She claimed about four drinks when video footage shows at least nine. And that's just what is known and if none were had before after or not seen and so on, nor the strength, don't know or recall on that.
Here we are with another mess of a case but is it? There's a lot of a blizzard created for special defense effects and to save her but prosecution felt the case strong before that happened and it still would be. And now we are seeing interference and connections and b.s.
I have no problem believing in corruption and I believe there is a lot of it, however, I also think that is used these days when it had nothing to do with an actual crime. It's unfortunate to say the least. These recent posts one can also see now there are connections, politics and infighting going on and calling in of other departments, higher ups, etc. imo.
So their claim was he was in a fight no? Or was beat up, died and he was dumped and she framed? What about the autopsy? If I recall, there's just too much to believe and too many excuses on her side.
And anyone can correct me if I'm wrong but she felt guilty and was willing to face things until they made this into a far more serious charging than most would face. It's even possible she hit him intentionally in a drunken fit of anger and then regretted it and took off but not provable. A fight and his death and framing is far less provable. Burden however is on prosecution and they felt they have ample. I think it overcharged at second degree murder but MAYBE they have reasons or evidence of why it isn't. Defense in any case sure won't share that part if so so we wouldn't know.
Defense has done a great job of getting what is likely a false story out into the public and making this case seem like at least a 50/50 of which version is true but when you get down to it and behind all the smoke or swirling sn*w from the blizzard, IF I recall, the proof isn't there on the defense part and it all came afterwards. Again defense doesn't have to meet the burden of proof but if they are going to give an alternate theory as to reasonable doubt or even total innocence, it has to hold water or it doesn't meet the bar imo.
Tough one though and I think most jurors would have a problem finding her guilty of second degree murder also unless there is something we don't know about and I think them charging her with such brought on all of the rest here. Every state's laws are different but I can't imagine this fitting that charge. A man is dead and don't get me wrong, she isn't innocent, she was arguably and probably even provably to a strong degree intoxicated and should not have been driving. So was he.
What are the tox results? Probably only taken on him as she wouldn't have been til at least the next day right? I'm not and never blame the victim but just asking and wondering about his motor skills and recognition also and speed to get out of the way of a car? For that reason too, I think it makes it overcharged. A pedestrian is vulnerable but that doesn't mean you should run out into traffic or not get out of the way of the path of a car or give it wide berth...
Again I am staying for the moment on overcharged. But guilty of a lesser charge. BUT I sure don't know I'm right by a long shot, jmo so far.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/cmg/4ZT4WS6A7VGWNP4V7EZIQM26NE.jpg)
www.boston25news.com
www.wcvb.com
www.bostonglobe.com
