OK it is your opinion that most of my post is incorrect.
Would be appreciated if you would elaborate on exactly what you are disputing.
its not really fair to make a negative blanket statement of someone's opinion post without the supporting information.
Occam razor is common sense. Of course it is used in trials.
First about Occam's Razor: The prosecution has to show that the defendant has committed the alleged crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense doesn't even have to put on a case. I thought that was a pretty standard interpretation of the burden of proof in criminal trials. If you disagree and feel that both sides should state their case and jurors can apply the principle of parsimony to determine the more likely scenario, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But fair point on elaborating on the facts where I believe you are mistaken. These are taken directly from your post:
drunk as a skunk...
So far, we haven't seen any proof that she was drunk at all. The most that's been said is she was drinking a clear liquid out of a glass with a lime into it and she carried it to another bar. Supposedly the commonwealth has her receipts from that night and video of her pouring shots into her drink, so why didn't they introduce them? It sure would have been better than the hours and hours of testimony about kids' sports teams and what their spouse does for a living that we got.
Supposedly we'll get blood evidence, but it was taken many hours later, so they have to use some calculation to backup and figure out her BAC at the time of the alleged murder. I believe this will be hotly disputed by the defense, so we'll see.
(The funny thing is I went into this trial 100% thinking she was drunk that night. I can't fathom why the commonwealth didn't introduce physical evidence like receipts/videos if they have them. And with all the bar patron testimony I just don't know anymore. Let's see what the BAC tests show.)
caught on video driving recklessly hitting random things in her inebriated state....
C'mon. You make it seem she was veering back-and-forth across the road hitting lampposts and street signs. That's not true. The next morning, at low speed, she bumped into the car behind her while backing out of the garage. Maybe because of the drinking but it was also snowing with low visibility and she was clearly distraught.
was at the scene of the crime inthe window necessary....
This is certainly the crux of the issue. First, there were a lot of people in the immediate vicinity that night. Second, from what I understand from the phone evidence that's been revealed to date, they arrived at the residence at 12:24 and his last steps were around 12:31. So at least a 7 minutes gap. I need to hear a lot more evidence to be able to say if she was really there at the time he died.
texts confirming the volatility of this relationship at that moment...
Nothing like that has been introduced to date. Or for that matter introduced in any of the preliminary hearings or court papers that I've seen. And it's also important to note the last time Karen and John were seen together they were acting very "lovey-dovey" with one another. How do we reconcile this supposed volatility with their behavior that evening?
multiple people unconnected witnessing her unsolicited confession....
This is not true at all. I think eight first responders at the scene testified and three say they heard her say it. All three were from the fire department and are coworkers, so obviously not unconnected. One says he heard it while working on John. The other two say they heard it while talking to Karen directly. However, video evidence shows that one of the two was in the ambulance at the time. Also, all the firefighters claim that cops were nearby when Karen said it, but none of the cops heard it. No one wrote it down and it was only brought up days later. Finally, even though Karen was screaming, nothing was picked up on the police car dashcam, although many of her other words could be heard.
(I'm not going to even get into the claims of perjury and friendships with the Alberts and all that.)
I just want to say that we know eyewitness testimony is unreliable in situation exactly like this one. A high-stress situation, someone is distraught and screaming, there's no recorded video/audio, no one is writing anything down, the witnesses may have conferred, only days later are people asked about what happened, and the stories have morphed over time. How can anyone convict on the certainty that Karen said "I hit him" rather than "Did I hit him"?
her ring camera footage mysteriously vanishes through the night.
Nothing like this has been mentioned at trial and I'm not sure what it would show anyways since the ring footage we did see doesn't show her taillight. Also, I should mention that the defense claims other exculpatory footage has gone missing.
karenreadma.wordpress.com
