Here is a pdf link to the CW Statement of Case.
And we still can't assume they asked her when her last drink was.The hospital, upon intake, drew her blood. In the series of tests ethanol is also tested. The hospital did not perform a BAC. Only a state laboratory can do this testing and they use whole blood for accurate results. A hospital only uses serum testing because they are trying to assess and treat quickly.
Hospital Blood Alcohol Lab Results: Are They Forensically Reliable? - Law Offices of Christopher L. Baxter
From time to time, you may encounter a DWI or vehicular assault/homicide prosecution where the State is attempting to introduce a defendant’s blood alcohol level obtained from a hospital lab rather than the State Police or county forensic laboratory. Traditionally, law enforcement obtains a...www.new-jersey-dui-defense.com
The Lack of Forensic Reliability of a Hospital BAC Result
While EIA testing achieves clinical and diagnostic objectives, it is not forensically reliable for a DWI or criminal prosecution where a blood alcohol level needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The reasons for its forensic unreliability can be organized into four categories.
But they didn't see her till 9a.m. right ? So at least 8 hours after she dropped him off.
I'm not aware I have made any but what conclusions are they? I'm just questioning ATM.
Not sure what that had to do with them actually asking her when her last drink was out who "they" is
I'm pretty sure this particular judge would not because these are the parameters for it to happen
Can a judge overturn a jury verdict? Is this different for guilty vs not guilty?
Answer (1 of 12): No judge in any state or federal court can overturn a “not guilty” verdict due to the Double Jeopardy Clause set out in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. No person can “be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb”…. A verdict of “not ...www.quora.com
If the verdict is clearly unreasonable, the defence can ask for a “judgment notwithstanding verdict”.
The burden is very high. The judge must be convinced that no reasonable jury would have convicted the defendant on the evidence presented at trial.
Normally it would be First Responders to the incident eg ambulance or LE. But I was actually responding to your post saying 'they' all said she didn't seem drunk. So you should know who you mean right?
"They" in what I was talking about were the very people with her that night that saw her the entire time. They ALL testified that she did not appear drunk that night.
She got nine shots, evidently and poured them into a glass. Those that were with her all testified she did not appear drunk. I've been known to have drinks bought for me but to not have actually drank them. She very well "might" have done that. Sometimes if people are sending you rounds, it's easier to accept and not drink than to decline. I'm not saying that's what she did, but if she really drank those 9 shots, it seems people trained to spot drunks would have noticed, doesn't it? And then those same people, many of which are cops, went ahead and let her drive away???One person, I forget who, testified that she had nine drinks.
She got nine shots, evidently and poured them into a glass. Those that were with her all testified she did not appear drunk. I've been known to have drinks bought for me but to not have actually drank them. She very well "might" have done that. Sometimes if people are sending you rounds, it's easier to accept and not drink than to decline. I'm not saying that's what she did, but if she really drank those 9 shots, it seems people trained to spot drunks would have noticed, doesn't it? And then those same people, many of which are cops, went ahead and let her drive away???
Truthfully, it is everywhere. If they do happen to get stopped, they flash their badge and get waved on. Rarely do they ever get charged for it. Just go to the bar closest to your location patrol station and look how many cops are blasted then get right into their cars.
www.msnbc.com
You are correct. I haven't seen you post anything regarding your opinion.
OPINION piece below. Expresses a lot of what some people are thinking about this case.
Opinion | Karen Read’s legal team has pulled off a rare miracle in criminal defense
Read’s team has pulled off a rare miracle in criminal defense: They have constructed an alternate theory of police cover-up that actually has some evidence to support it.
The fascinating defense theory in Karen Read’s murder trial
June 29, 2024, 6:00 AM EDT
By Danny Cevallos, MSNBC legal analyst
My job is to follow legal stories in the news. Apparently, I’m not so great at my job. A month ago, when a nonjournalist friend messaged me to ask about my thoughts on the Karen Read murder trial. My response was: “Who’s Karen Read?” I didn’t know what they were talking about. Weeks later, and after many messages from other friends, I know who Karen Read is. I can’t avoid knowing who Karen Read is. This feels like the rare trial that has transcended the already-popular true crime realm and launched into the mainstream.
And as a Boston jury continues its dayslong deliberations, speculation is rampant. On Friday, the jury said it was struggling to reach a verdict. The judge told them to keep trying. And so we wait.
Karen Read is a 44-year-old finance professor in Massachusetts accused of intentionally backing her Lexus SUV into her boyfriend, John O'Keefe, a Boston police officer, and leaving him to die, unconscious outside a house party in a blizzard. There was damage to her vehicle, and Read allegedly made a number of incriminating statements at the scene of the crime, including: “I hit him. I hit him. Oh my God. I hit him.”
Case closed, right? The prosecution’s case seemed pretty straightforward: a classic lovers’ quarrel turned deadly. Or maybe another common scenario: drunken-driver-didn’t-realize-she-had-hit-someone. So at first I didn’t understand why this case had sparked so much interest. Prosecutors had evidence of damage to the back of Read’s vehicle, evidence she was driving drunk, evidence that she had a “rough” relationship with the victim, expletive-laced voicemails from Read to the victim’s phone, and what seemed to be voluntary admissions by the defendant that she had hit the victim.
But that was before I dug into the evidence, watched closing arguments and immersed myself in the defense’s theory of the case. Now, if I were on the jury, I’d vote not guilty.
I want to be clear here: I’m not so sure Read is innocent. Instead, I think there’s reasonable doubt of her guilt. And that means she’s not guilty. Read’s defense team has pulled off a rare miracle in criminal defense: They have constructed an alternate theory of police cover-up that actually has some evidence to support it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More at link. ~Summer
this is my thought .. not a conspiracy but a bad law enforcement attempt to cover up whatever really happened & a ridiculous investigation by MSP