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?

 

[Guess Who]

The garage video was manipulated on purpose. Had it been a mistake the time stamps would be reversed as well

So who manipulated the video? Who asked them to manipulated the video, and why.

Exactly. The two together, one being inverted and the other not, is how we know 100% "somebody" manipulated it. One inverted and the other not inverted is not how they work.

 

[Ranch]

The garage video was manipulated on purpose. Had it been a mistake the time stamps would be reversed as well

So who manipulated the video? Who asked them to manipulate the video, and why.

The why is very important. I haven't seen a good and convincing reason yet. To confuse the jury doesn't cut it for me.

 

[Guess Who]

Okay. I'm not a camera expert so my idea be wrong.

It would be consistent if it was a delay.

 

[Guess Who]

The why is very important. I haven't seen a good and convincing reason yet. To confuse the jury doesn't cut it for me.

To make it look like the "mysterious figure" wasn't hanging over by the taillight in question. Their version makes it appear they are on the driver's side.

 

[Ranch]

It would be consistent if it was a delay.

I get your point. I'm not sure that I agree.

 

[Ranch]

To make it look like the "mysterious figure" wasn't hanging over by the taillight in question. Their version makes it appear they are on the driver's side.

Hanging over the tail light in question wouldn't prove anything since they claim it was damaged when Karen Read backed over O'Keefe.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Does anyone care to predict which people will either lose their job or be arrested for being part of a conspiracy to frame Karen Read?

Imo Karen killed him so it isn't framing of an innocent person. Now if you are talking about helping the investigation or manufacturing evidence, that's entirely different and I'm not convinced of that either because if they did so, it wasn't exactly done brilliantly. This looks at more like total ineptness by people who are dumb enough morons to talk about women for instance the way Proctor did about Karen, talk to each other about the case, thinking they can privately, etc. And to a POINT, they CAN.

I far from defend all of them but I don't defend Read either. And I don't believe every person involved in this investigation, every witness, every expert, ever member of LE, etc. that had anything to do with it is corrupt. Why either side has pursued it to this point is beyond me. Why didn't they give her a slap on the wrist, she accept it, as they do when something happens to one of their own on a night ALL of them worry about the fact they were partying, drinking, driving, you name it...

Of course the public would have grumbled a bit that she got off light being friends and the cop's gf... And I even wonder if that isn't where it was headed until it became clear she did this and did it intentionally.... Perhaps.

Who knows.

I can see a lot of it and agree with a lot as a possibility but I do not believe for a minute he was killed in the home and she was framed. And then things were buried under layers of sn*w including a shoe and then what the sn*w put back undisturbed? That's ridiculous. In the few hours they were out there doing this lol, most drunk and tired, and doing it in a perfect time frame per the weather and anyone seeing them. It's ludicrous.

She hit him and she killed him whether intentionally or unintentionally.

They however have found out royally how you'd better just not talk of a thing at all and certainly not text it, etc. and how to do a few things better when investigating.

But I don't think they were worried about being after her in the first moments, they were worried about how to handle it or hush it or spin it for all including her, reeling of how to do damage control but then they realized what she'd done. Or something on that order.

I don't expect agreement by most.

And they were really thinking to do his shoe too. Tell me if I'm correct or not, Proctor was not at this party was he? Pretty sure not. And a lot falls down right there.

Jmo.

 

[GrandmaBear]

They should, whether they will or not, I have no clue. They 100% need to be investigated.

Define "they". That's pretty vague and broad, just saying.

 

[Guess Who]

Imo Karen killed him so it isn't framing of an innocent person. Now if you are talking about helping the investigation or manufacturing evidence, that's entirely different and I'm not convinced of that either because if they did so, it wasn't exactly done brilliantly. This looks at more like total ineptness by people who are dumb enough morons to talk about women for instance the way Proctor did about Karen, talk to each other about the case, thinking they can privately, etc. And to a POINT, they CAN.

I far from defend all of them but I don't defend Read either. And I don't believe every person involved in this investigation, every witness, every expert, ever member of LE, etc. that had anything to do with it is corrupt. Why either side has pursued it to this point is beyond me. Why didn't they give her a slap on the wrist, she accept it, as they do when something happens to one of their own on a night ALL of them worry about the fact they were partying, drinking, driving, you name it...

Of course the public would have grumbled a bit that she got off light being friends and the cop's gf... And I even wonder if that isn't where it was headed until it became clear she did this and did it intentionally.... Perhaps.

Who knows.

I can see a lot of it and agree with a lot as a possibility but I do not believe for a minute he was killed in the home and she was framed. And then things were buried under layers of sn*w including a shoe and then what the sn*w put back undisturbed? That's ridiculous. In the few hours they were out there doing this lol, most drunk and tired, and doing it in a perfect time frame per the weather and anyone seeing them. It's ludicrous.

She hit him and she killed him whether intentionally or unintentionally.

They however have found out royally how you'd better just not talk of a thing at all and certainly not text it, etc. and how to do a few things better when investigating.

But I don't think they were worried about being after her in the first moments, they were worried about how to handle it or hush it or spin it for all including her, reeling of how to do damage control but then they realized what she'd done. Or something on that order.

I don't expect agreement by most.

And they were really thinking to do his shoe too. Tell me if I'm correct or not, Proctor was not at this party was he? Pretty sure not. And a lot falls down right there.

Jmo.

If she hit him, where are his lower body injuries, any of his skin, blood or fibers on her car and how do the injuries he does have relate to any kind of him being hit? His body tells the story of NOT being hit by a vehicle, let alone one that would have to be going in reverse while jumping a curb. NONE of his injuries are consistent with an auto of any kind hitting him. If you are going by his shoe that was laying on the road, why does the one in the pic show a black sole and the one presented in court as being the one they found in the road have a white one?

 

[GrandmaBear]

That inverted footage made it appear that nobody was near and lurking around the "broken" taillight. I had noticed it looked as if he exited the vehicle from the passenger side but at that time I hadn't realized it was him actually getting out of the driver's side. Doesn't that paint an entirely different picture than what actually happened? No way that was accidental, then add that the time stamps were not inverted. They also painted themselves into a corner by stating the cameras were motion activated yet it starts was after the car is in the bay and not as it's entering. How did it get there in a way that required no motion? Also the people in the video suddenly levitate to a new place while in frame that motion detecting would catch.

My cameras first show a car once it is in the driveway. NOT them entering. This is because that is the motion that gets it up and going and then boom a car appears. Same with people. Totally typical. Not to mention seen many a case with video like that or poor video. Gannon Stauch's, you can see some things but not all as it goes on and only captures AFTER movement. I see such with other things too, birds, deer, etc. They have already moved in when I get the first picture or video.

 

[Guess Who]

My cameras first show a car once it is in the driveway. NOT them entering. This is because that is the motion that gets it up and going and then boom a car appears. Same with people. Totally typical. Not to mention seen many a case with video like that or poor video. Gannon Stauch's, you can see some things but not all as it goes on and only captures AFTER movement. I see such with other things too, birds, deer, etc.
In a different thread, Proctor made a comment about Yannetti, writing, after having to stop processing Read's phone upon finding protected communication between her and her attorney, that he was going through "his r------- client's phone. No nudes so far. I hate that man, I truly hate him."
The comment was "a distasteful joke," Proctor explained, adding later that he was not looking for nude pictures but "location data text communications … more evidence contained within the phone."

but it doesn't start after they are parked and 100% stopped and your time stamp is not in reverse.

your words "all as it goes on and only captures AFTER movement." yes, it starts with movement and doesn't start after the movement stops.

"

 

[GrandmaBear]

In my opinion that police bay video is of such poor quality that you can't get any useful information from it. Whether you un invert it or not. A delay from when motion is detected to camera being on makes sense to me.

it does to me too. It's how mine work. It's what motion activated means. There IS motion and THEN it starts recording. There are a lot of settings one can change and also can pay for upgraded service OR cameras even but motion activated means motion activates it, it turns on gets busy and captures the next bit. and then if it gets still it has to be "woken up again. Each one in fact.

 

[Guess Who]

it does to me too. It's how mine work. It's what motion activated means. There IS motion and THEN it starts recording. There are a lot of settings one can change and also can pay for upgraded service OR cameras even but motion activated means motion activates it, it turns on gets busy and captures the next bit. and then if it gets still it has to be "woken up again. Each one in fact.

Yours do not work by inverting the video, do they (nobody's does)? and if they do, does the time stamp get inverted too?

 

[GrandmaBear]

I agree that we don't need a baby sitter or to be policed. But I'll be honest that I will not take very much time out of my day to verify what some social media person has posted is real or true.

Maybe I'll just cherry pick them and the ones that go with the way I feel get my okay and the ones that don't get ignored.

Lol I think for some that is how they roll. I can think of one in particular and not just in this case. ignores any that don't agree with the person's theory.

I don't disagree, I won't do it either. I find most of the coverage in here very biased. Summer is posting news articles that are at least not emotional nor biased and those are the closest to real coverage imo as far as I can tell by reporters that are covering both sides.

I share a few some times in other cases that I will SAY aren't my favorite channel, take it with a grain of salt, but they will have a video on the case with some good thoughts, YT generally, and then there are a number I say I do trust and link theirs. They aren't "reporters" or "news media" as in credentialed of course. There are a few many of us tend to like though. A few that are attorneys. Etc.

Turtle Boy well he's in his own league. I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Most are just good delving into the case that I watch and the facts, or that I share, and very responsible.

I don't know that I've ever seen a thread here so biased as this one lol. I mean sometimes we all agree that someone is guilty and based on much to base it on but this is different. And that's fine.

What I read of Turtleboy's Tweets (I don't tweet either or do X I guess it is called now) yeah it would be anyone's guess if this is what he claims to see in expressions and goings on, etc. as it is very inflammatory and meant to influence imo. In fact the entire campaign by defense has been to influence.

Not saying some isn't deserved against the prosecution and LE, for sure.

I'm more in the middle though.

And of course you can't go vet everything that is posted. I know I for one don't want a JT site though. Many of us post things others won't watch and some won't watch any even if it is a real reporter on YT interviewing a juror or a witness that was on the stand. I though don't seek out MSM who covers little of most cases anyhow.

I'm probably not making much sense but this is not unusual at all but Turtleboy may be, not seen too much linked from him prior to this.

Just discount it if you don't know or trust it, I'd say that's what we all do if no time to vet or like some just against Twitter or YT or whatever who almost all new have real media on them (if you can call MSM that either). Nate Eaton would be an example that I would say almost all of us trust as a REAL reporter and yet there is no physical news room, it's all online and I never even realized that over all these years until he said as much in a recent video. East Idaho News. Absolutely exceptional imo.

Anyhow I don't need to go on. Very happy to see you by the way. I don't do this case much and never get in the basement anymore due to lack of time and not much interest in this one but hope all is well and good to see you.

 

[Guess Who]

Hanging over the tail light in question wouldn't prove anything since they claim it was damaged when Karen Read backed over O'Keefe.

It brings into question what were they doing there and possibly how those mysterious pieces of glass got on her bumper. The pieces of glass proctor conveniently found "sitting" on the bumper after being hoisted onto a flatbed and drove for over 60 miles that does not match the glass they found on the yard. The guy that suspiciously looks like proctor looks like he's standing next to the servers side in this version. You don't think that if they showed the non inverted one people wouldn't be asking what he was doing there by that taillight? That taillight that nobody that was supposed to be investigating took a pic of before it was even towed away (crime scene 101 -evidence documentation). That taillight that does not appear to have much, if any damage in that video of her backing into his car that happened after she supposedly already hit him. That taillight that was described by other witnesses that saw it as "cracked" or small hole. Etc

 

[Ranch]

Lol I think for some that is how they roll. I can think of one in particular and not just in this case. ignores any that don't agree with the person's theory.

I don't disagree, I won't do it either. I find most of the coverage in here very biased. Summer is posting news articles that are at least not emotional nor biased and those are the closest to real coverage imo as far as I can tell by reporters that are covering both sides.

I share a few some times in other cases that I will SAY aren't my favorite channel, take it with a grain of salt, but they will have a video on the case with some good thoughts, YT generally, and then there are a number I say I do trust and link theirs. They aren't "reporters" or "news media" as in credentialed of course. There are a few many of us tend to like though. A few that are attorneys. Etc.

Turtle Boy well he's in his own league. I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Most are just good delving into the case that I watch and the facts, or that I share, and very responsible.

I don't know that I've ever seen a thread here so biased as this one lol. I mean sometimes we all agree that someone is guilty and based on much to base it on but this is different. And that's fine.

What I read of Turtleboy's Tweets (I don't tweet either or do X I guess it is called now) yeah it would be anyone's guess if this is what he claims to see in expressions and goings on, etc. as it is very inflammatory and meant to influence imo. In fact the entire campaign by defense has been to influence.

Not saying some isn't deserved against the prosecution and LE, for sure.

I'm more in the middle though.

And of course you can't go vet everything that is posted. I know I for one don't want a JT site though. Many of us post things others won't watch and some won't watch any even if it is a real reporter on YT interviewing a juror or a witness that was on the stand. I though don't seek out MSM who covers little of most cases anyhow.

I'm probably not making much sense but this is not unusual at all but Turtleboy may be, not seen too much linked from him prior to this.

Just discount it if you don't know or trust it, I'd say that's what we all do if no time to vet or like some just against Twitter or YT or whatever who almost all new have real media on them (if you can call MSM that either). Nate Eaton would be an example that I would say almost all of us trust as a REAL reporter and yet there is no physical news room, it's all online and I never even realized that over all these years until he said as much in a recent video. East Idaho News. Absolutely exceptional imo.

Anyhow I don't need to go on. Very happy to see you by the way. I don't do this case much and never get in the basement anymore due to lack of time and not much interest in this one but hope all is well and good to see you.

Thanks for the reply and it's good to see you too.

 

[Ranch]

It brings into question what were they doing there and possibly how those mysterious pieces of glass got on her bumper. The pieces of glass proctor conveniently found "sitting" on the bumper after being hoisted onto a flatbed and drove for over 60 miles that does not match the glass they found on the yard. The guy that suspiciously looks like proctor looks like he's standing next to the servers side in this version. You don't think that if they showed the non inverted one people wouldn't be asking what he was doing there by that taillight? That taillight that nobody that was supposed to be investigating took a pic of before it was even towed away (crime scene 101 -evidence documentation). That taillight that does not appear to have much, if any damage in that video of her backing into his car that happened after she supposedly already hit him. That taillight that was described by other witnesses that saw it as "cracked" or small hole. Etc

For me the video doesn't tell me anything because I don't see anyone tampering with the tail light. Of course you feel that part of the video has been removed. I'm just not convinced of that.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Yours do not work by inverting the video, do they (nobody's does)? and if they do, does the time stamp get inverted too?

Did I mention the inverting or time stamps? I was talking directly to your remarks about the motion activated part lol so do not say I said a word about the other because show me where I did? I can talk to both of those but am not going to confuse what I was talking about by you trying to take it there. I am talking just the motion activation. And I note your response here did not even mention what I was talking of even though you are the one who said there's no delay or form the minute there is motion there is as recording, there is NOT. I have cameras now and I worry as I don't and can't ensure all is fine at the property I own and for the couple of years I have had them it has been a learning curve as to what to worry about and what not to because I would see such things. No one there, no vehicle there, all of a sudden there one is. Same with anything that moves. And another thing is I have three up and it would likely take six just to cover every angle just in the front. As you said about DNA to emu in Delphi, it is a TOOL. There are all levels of cameras, and modes of how high of sensitivity, and then range. Motion activated is NOT going to catch all, you'd need something that was 24/7 constantly recording and all areas covered.

Agree with you on other cases and know you like to do this but I am calling you out on you mentioned the inserting and the time stamp. I WAS TALKING ONLY TO motion activation. And you ignored that and turned it. Makes for interesting back and forth though because I'm calling you out on it. Lol.

 

[Guess Who]

For me the video doesn't tell me anything because I don't see anyone tampering with the tail light. Of course you feel that part of the video has been removed. I'm just not convinced of that.

Moral of the story - if it was "accidentally" inverted the time stamps would be inverted also

The question then becomes why did they do that if it meant nothing? Why invert the video and then go though the terrible of editing the time stamp?

 

[Ranch]

Moral of the story - if it was "accidentally" inverted the time stamps would be inverted also

The question then becomes why did they do that if it meant nothing? Why invert the video and then go though the terrible of editing the time stamp?

If I said that the video was intentionally inverted would you agree with me?