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?

 

[GrandmaBear]

The same search shows at 2:27am that also shows at 10:33am. Now, surely, that can't be right.
The only thing that makes sense to me is that those searches didn't occur at those times.
Also, Jen testified that sometime after she got home, she got onto her phone, a time that coincides with the 2:27am timestamp.

Same misspelling etc. you mean?

 

[GrandmaBear]

We'll see what the phone expert says.

Yeah, BOTH. Can only assume each side will have one.

 

[GrandmaBear]

People often re-search things they did previously.

Sure, could be, and IF that's what happened.

 

[GrandmaBear]

OK, I see the 10:33 search listed starting at the 46:06 timestamp in the link below. Per your previous question, yes she did make that search again when she reopened the browser tab in 'incognito'. The search at 2:27 was not in 'incognito' mode so it was saved to a db-wal file.

View attachment 22107

I have to say, and I know pictures don't tell all but people sure do interpret them in trials as to defendant's smirks, expressions, etc. and I'd call that quite a look by Karen and pretty smug is the word that comes to mind. Not what I'd be trying to appear like but then just talking surface stuff as has been done in Daybell and many other a case.

One does have to admit Regina brought up things that apparently no one else here was aware of and you found to be fact. And all of you are watching the trial right? I'm not, so I couldn't comment on how easy to catch this.

If none of you knew of it, apparently it isn't in all the stuff all over the internet or brought up by the defense?

I know you to be fair and so I am wondering if this is the first you knew of this and it would seem it is, for all of you leaning on the one side?

Wouldn't these searches have been AFTER Karen was calling hysterically and more...? I'm not great with the timeline or even AFTER or around when found?

 

[GrandmaBear]

It is so cool to have a computer expert on this board!!

It most definitely is. She's a gem in all ways that @kdg411 gal...

 

[GrandmaBear]

What is Camerano's relationship in all of this?

She said what it was in the post you responded to here didn't she? Lost me on that one. Okay though. Just catching up with threads.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Karen called Kathryn Camerano between 4-5am on Saturday, January 29th, 2022 and was screaming where's Mike, where's Mike.

Clip starts at her testimony.


IMOO Karen was calling people that may know where John would be.

And/or possibly to cover that she knew where he likely was. Just saying it is as much a possibility. Did she sleep or go to bed in this little bit of time from drop off to phone calls...

 

[Cousin Dupree]

Karen called Kathryn Camerano between 4-5am on Saturday, January 29th, 2022 and was screaming where's Mike, where's Mike.

Clip starts at her testimony.


IMOO Karen was calling people that may know where John would be.

Does she have any reason to lie?

 

[GrandmaBear]

Does she have any reason to lie?

You're unclear who you mean. Karen or Kathryn? Karen certainly does have reason to lie if she hit him and knows it. Why would Kathryn and she was someone Karen called upset asking where Mike was... And apparently for knowing the case so well you did not know about this, that call, etc. Probably because all you know comes from a one way street of the defense and PR campaign that leaves out anything that may play the other way. And no one seemed to know of the other searches either. CLEARLY that's what happens when those that follow it the most closely with blinders and all that is out there is defense stuff, and you and others are the most up on it versus like me, but are you.... Because you know of none of this other stuff nor noticed any of it it seems.... Questionable sources I guess that are one sided and just watching the very intentionally put out stuff by the defense and shows they got it onto.

For some reason and I'm not positive, once this was mentioned, I think I HAVE heard of multiple searches. Most things are ONE way but I have seen a show or two where actually the other side is represented and why is it I think I had heard this before... Yet no one here seems to think they did.

Will Karen take the stand do you think? I don't. Although I think there's a part of her that would and thinks she could lie and best it. JMO OF COURSE. I think she's full of it and thinks she has balls but I don't think she has those kind that could stand up to it because I think she did it and she knows it. Always has known imo.

 

[kdg411]

I have to say, and I know pictures don't tell all but people sure do interpret them in trials as to defendant's smirks, expressions, etc. and I'd call that quite a look by Karen and pretty smug is the word that comes to mind. Not what I'd be trying to appear like but then just talking surface stuff as has been done in Daybell and many other a case.

One does have to admit Regina brought up things that apparently no one else here was aware of and you found to be fact. And all of you are watching the trial right? I'm not, so I couldn't comment on how easy to catch this.

If none of you knew of it, apparently it isn't in all the stuff all over the internet or brought up by the defense?

I know you to be fair and so I am wondering if this is the first you knew of this and it would seem it is, for all of you leaning on the one side?

Wouldn't these searches have been AFTER Karen was calling hysterically and more...? I'm not great with the timeline or even AFTER or around when found?

The 10:33 search isn't relevant because it's a google search that happened after the fact. JM did make that search at 2:27 though and that creates doubt about her testimony and credibility.

The timeline provided by the CW suggest Officer O'Keefe was backed into and ran over at 12:25. However, Jennifer McCabe testified that she witnessed Karen Read pulling away from 34 Fairview Road at 12:45. Brian Nagel arrived at the same time as Karen Read (12:21). He was there to pick up his sister who was at the home of 34 Fairview Road. He never saw her reverse and the other two people in the vehicle only saw Karen Read in her SUV. If John O'Keefe was supposedly hit by Karen at 12:25 how does this timeline work?

 

[kdg411]

Look at this detailed document created with facts only. The creator is not an attorney nor has taken any position on this case. This data is confirmed from public documents and testimony already received. The timeline tab is critical.

 

[Guess Who]

John's phone sure made a lot of steps right before the 911 call.

 

[GrandmaBear]

The 10:33 search isn't relevant because it's a google search that happened after the fact. JM did make that search at 2:27 though and that creates doubt about her testimony and credibility.

The timeline provided by the CW suggest Officer O'Keefe was backed into and ran over at 12:25. However, Jennifer McCabe testified that she witnessed Karen Read pulling away from 34 Fairview Road at 12:45. Brian Nagel arrived at the same time as Karen Read (12:21). He was there to pick up his sister who was at the home of 34 Fairview Road. He never saw her reverse and the other two people in the vehicle only saw Karen Read in her SUV. If John O'Keefe was supposedly hit by Karen at 12:25 how does this timeline work?

THANK YOU. That's what I THOUGHT. Seemed to me like everyone was saying she googled this before he was even dead or killed in the (false) fight tin the home, etc. or some such and this was part of their plan or checking on it. I'm not looking at it working the way you are, I am looking for the fact she never googled this before someone may have been worried or known he was out there and Karen had hit him. For just ONE thing I am wondering and looking at...

I don't see at all how it proves some fight in the home and placing him out there. That's so far fetched to me, you are going to place someone that is alive out in the yard and count on him diying? That makes NO sense at all.

I have some thoughts and I think they are more likely than either side's thing being entirely true.

Also plays into wondering what Karen's records show and sadly they probably don't have it but any other phone she may have used, like one of the niece or nephew..

Not sure about that side of things but I have a real theory of the Google search that sure isn't the conspiracy one that is espoused by so many and is a lot more likely.

However, I also am going to wait for all this evidence and to hear more of it. Can't watch so have to count on not getting just one side of things.

 

[GrandmaBear]

The 10:33 search isn't relevant because it's a google search that happened after the fact. JM did make that search at 2:27 though and that creates doubt about her testimony and credibility.

The timeline provided by the CW suggest Officer O'Keefe was backed into and ran over at 12:25. However, Jennifer McCabe testified that she witnessed Karen Read pulling away from 34 Fairview Road at 12:45. Brian Nagel arrived at the same time as Karen Read (12:21). He was there to pick up his sister who was at the home of 34 Fairview Road. He never saw her reverse and the other two people in the vehicle only saw Karen Read in her SUV. If John O'Keefe was supposedly hit by Karen at 12:25 how does this timeline work?

Also how is it not relevant just in the overall picture/case?

I also asked if it was the exact same misspelled search terms because that thought and likelihood is a totally different view/theory than what I just talked of above. Both imo are more likely than the defense story, or the full truth from some on the other side either.

All my own thoughts, not getting them from anywhere and I may be all wrong and wet but both make more sense than anything so far but I want to be sure I have the times and facts straight as well AND see what comes in evidence etc...

 

[kdg411]

THANK YOU. That's what I THOUGHT. Seemed to me like everyone was saying she googled this before he was even dead or killed in the (false) fight tin the home, etc. or some such and this was part of their plan or checking on it. I'm not looking at it working the way you are, I am looking for the fact she never googled this before someone may have been worried or known he was out there and Karen had hit him. For just ONE thing I am wondering and looking at...

I don't see at all how it proves some fight in the home and placing him out there. That's so far fetched to me, you are going to place someone that is alive out in the yard and count on him diying? That makes NO sense at all.

I have some thoughts and I think they are more likely than either side's thing being entirely true.

Also plays into wondering what Karen's records show and sadly they probably don't have it but any other phone she may have used, like one of the niece or nephew..

Not sure about that side of things but I have a real theory of the Google search that sure isn't the conspiracy one that is espoused by so many and is a lot more likely.

However, I also am going to wait for all this evidence and to hear more of it. Can't watch so have to count on not getting just one side of things.

You are very welcome. If you have questions feel free to ask.

In all honesty, I don't know how Officer John O'Keefe ended up where he did. I'm looking forward to hearing from the ME & Cellebrite experts to hopefully help fill in some of the missing pieces. A conspiracy is hard to wrap my mind around. The investigation is the issue here. Hopefully, we'll hear from Proctor at some point.

FYI .. The court is in session on Tuesday only this week and it's a full day.

 

[kdg411]

Also how is it not relevant just in the overall picture/case?

I also asked if it was the exact same misspelled search terms because that thought and likelihood is a totally different view/theory than what I just talked of above. Both imo are more likely than the defense story, or the full truth from some on the other side either.

All my own thoughts, not getting them from anywhere and I may be all wrong and wet but both make more sense than anything so far but I want to be sure I have the times and facts straight as well AND see what comes in evidence etc...

In my mind it's not relevant because she could search as many times as she wants aftwards. However, she searched that phrase hours before Karen knew anything about him being missing. To search prior to finding him showed she knew something more than she's testified to.

 

[GrandmaBear]

@Cousin Dupree I swear I saw on break today you made a remark about JO's 36 steps. I was going to respond to it tonight and now cannot find it. Did you delete or I am just tired and can't find? Very well could be.

I saw it though and so at end of break from my car to store I counted my steps as I walked to head back in. And it was nothing significant for distance, etc. at all and quickly reached such. I suspect maybe you did the same and deleted your post or I'm wrong and just in skimming last couple of pages now can't find it.

 

[GrandmaBear]

In my mind it's not relevant because she could search as many times as she wants aftwards. However, she searched that phrase hours before Karen knew anything about him being missing. To search prior to finding him showed she knew something more than she's testified to.

And yet it is not such a proven dead ringer that the case has been dismissed... Or appealed to get such during the case...

I also think it is definitely interesting if it is the exact mispelled search. As you are well aware lol I am no tech expert and you are but that does not take away from weird sh*t I have witnessed myself. I don't necessarily think though it is anything about that, I think the answer is likely something far more easy to believe and logical.

At least tell me this, you were not aware of it sounded like this 10:33 or whatever search and you did go to find it, etc. and find out it was true, so why? And I can believe it was just to determine what it showed and that there was one but just asking.

Also what would have been going on at 10:33...? I am not up on the whole day's timeline. By then was he pronounced, taken, a hysterical Karen at the hospital and the friends or Jen just sitting around googling how long to die at 10:33 a.m.

I'm not being sarcastic, I truly don't know and am trying to put some thoughts together and I'd never be such to you.

I differ on my thoughts here from you but ALSO as I've said many times was waiting for trial and all evidence in this one even though I do lean towards Karen did this. Not sold on everyone else though and let's just say when some knew what is one thought...

 

[Guess Who]

And yet it is not such a proven dead ringer that the case has been dismissed... Or appealed to get such during the case...

I also think it is definitely interesting if it is the exact mispelled search. As you are well aware lol I am no tech expert and you are but that does not take away from weird sh*t I have witnessed myself. I don't necessarily think though it is anything about that, I think the answer is likely something far more easy to believe and logical.

At least tell me this, you were not aware of it sounded like this 10:33 or whatever search and you did go to find it, etc. and find out it was true, so why? And I can believe it was just to determine what it showed and that there was one but just asking.

Also what would have been going on at 10:33...? I am not up on the whole day's timeline. By then was he pronounced, taken, a hysterical Karen at the hospital and the friends or Jen just sitting around googling how long to die at 10:33 a.m.

I'm not being sarcastic, I truly don't know and am trying to put some thoughts together and I'd never be such to you.

I differ on my thoughts here from you but ALSO as I've said many times was waiting for trial and all evidence in this one even though I do lean towards Karen did this. Not sold on everyone else though and let's just say when some knew what is one thought...

The exact misspelled search just means that she either just refreshed a previous search or typed a couple of letters and picked the auto fill from the previous search. I do it all the time.

 

[GrandmaBear]

The exact misspelled search just means that she either just refreshed a previous search or typed a couple of letters and picked the auto fill from the previous search. I do it all the time.

When one was incognito? Seems to me if you were trying to have no record, you wouldn't pick a previous anything or want a history much less to use such and see there is one, and that's if it even came up as an option in different modes. Hard to say, you can assume that but doesn't mean it's the case.

I'm no tech person but I find it all pretty odd and what is MORE odd is how no one even mentioned any of all this or seemed to even know about it whether it matters or not. It just goes to show that all is not known by even those who think they know the entire case and facts because almost all of it comes from the defense.

Not saying what it means either way myself but am waiting to hear more.

Here's the other thing--so what is it supposed to mean? That there was a fight and a dog was involved too and she knew and was googling if they threw JO in the elements in the yard no less that he was alive and they'd DO THAT and wanted to know how long he'd have to lay there before he died? That's ludicrous. So you'd take the chance of putting someone alive out there, hoping he dies and doesn't come to, yell, someone finds him, etc. And HOPE he dies?

The above SEEMS to be what those who buy the defense bull think. It's the LEAST likely scenario and makes no sense imo. There are some that do make sense though. Or at least wouldn't be ridiculously out there.