MISTRIAL MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #18

Just wondering how the judge will maneuver this so she can deny their motion. This was surely a violation of some sort, to not give the defense a video which may have aided their client in the first trial. Did the CW have this video, when the defense was trying to obtain Higgins ( and B Alberts) phone records? (Subsequently Denied by the court ).

Mistrial, IMO

Very similar to what happened in Alec Baldwin case, IMO. DA dropped the ball big time there, and held back evidence.

Then again, this is MA. And stranger things have happened.
I keep hearing the Judge's voice...." I'll allow it ".
 
Just wondering how the judge will maneuver this so she can deny their motion. This was surely a violation of some sort, to not give the defense a video which may have aided their client in the first trial. Did the CW have this video, when the defense was trying to obtain Higgins ( and B Alberts) phone records? (Subsequently Denied by the court ).

Mistrial, IMO

Very similar to what happened in Alec Baldwin case, IMO. DA dropped the ball big time there, and held back evidence.

Then again, this is MA. And stranger things have happened.
I keep hearing the Judge's voice...." I'll allow it ".
Yes @shotgun09 …. I concur. And just might that be exculpatory evidence? Or something the defense might have benefited from perhaps or something favorable to the defendant? IANAL.

And in terms of maneuvering……. just wonder if maybe the CW, DA, prosecution team, trooper proctor, other questionable witnesses, and the judge will pull the whole apple cart over? And who it might fall on? Maybe themselves? And let’s not forget derrière dialing either. MOO
 
A Brady violation- very serious.

Google:

If the prosecution in a criminal case withholds exculpatory materials (evidence that could prove a defendant's innocence) during discovery, the defendant can file a motion to the court alleging a "Brady violation," which could lead to sanctions against the prosecution, a mistrial, or even a reversal of a conviction if the withheld evidence is deemed "material" to the case and could have significantly impacted the outcome of the trial; essentially, the defendant may be granted a new trial due to the unfairness of the proceedings.



Key points about this situation:
  • Brady rule:
    This legal principle, stemming from the case "Brady v. Maryland," mandates that prosecutors must disclose all exculpatory evidence to the defense, even if they haven't requested it.
  • Materiality:
    For a withheld evidence to be considered a "Brady violation," the defense must prove that the evidence was "material," meaning it could have reasonably affected the outcome of the trial.

    • Dismissal of charges: In extreme cases, the court may dismiss the charges against the defendant if the prosecution's misconduct is deemed egregious.
  • New trial: The most common outcome is granting the defendant a new trial where the previously withheld exculpatory evidence can be presented.

  • Disciplinary action against the prosecutor: Depending on the jurisdiction, the prosecutor may face ethical sanctions or disciplinary action for failing to disclose exculpatory evidence.
 
shocked.jpg

....that the CW, DA, prosecution team, trooper proctor, and other questionable witnesses pulled this kind of shady stunt! Throw it......NO airlift it onto the enormous pile of shady things they've all done to frame Karen Read!!!!!
 
Yes @shotgun09 …. I concur. And just might that be exculpatory evidence? Or something the defense might have benefited from perhaps or something favorable to the defendant? IANAL.

And in terms of maneuvering……. just wonder if maybe the CW, DA, prosecution team, trooper proctor, other questionable witnesses, and the judge will pull the whole apple cart over? And who it might fall on? Maybe themselves? And let’s not forget derrière dialing either. MOO
I forgot all about the DD. If that's going to be included in trial x2 will have to reconsider following afterall! Seriously though, have the CW ditched some footage, forever lost, of Brian Higgins on the blower out front of Canton Police Station at 1.30am on the night in question? Tell me it isn't so.
 
New defense filing in Karen Read case. #WBZ



US Attorney Josh Levy has stepped down, as of Jan 5, 2025.
Not sure who is in control of this fiasco of a trial now.


In my opinion Judge cannone is firmly in control of this trial.
 

1/24/25

Did Prosecutors Hide And Destroy Evidence In Karen Read's Case? What Happens Now?​


Interesting how he thinks the judge will make the CW pay for Read's expert while Mark Bederow, one of Aidan Kearney's attorneys, thinks there is no chance in hell she'd ever go there. Neither regularly practice in MA though.

Whether it was all - or mostly - related to complete incompetence or intentional acts done to frame Read, the amount of state and local law enforcement screw ups and mishandling of evidence here is breathtaking.

The failure to immediately request entry into the house for a complete search, or the failure to obtain a warrant if entry was refused. The failure to isolate and individually interview all the people in the house to learn what they heard and saw or didn't see and hear. The failure to secure and post someone at the scene at all times The blood put in the neighbor's solo cups put in wet grocery bags and stored next to Read's car in the sallyport.

The failure to canvess the neighborhood for videos of Read coming and going or to learn what the neighbors may have seen or heard. (Acccording to the CW, John's body lay on the lawn for over 5 hours. Wouldn't they want to know if any doctors or nurses or other essential workers drove by that morning? Fairview is not a side street and it connects to other streets.) The failure to interview the snow plow driver.

The failure to check any businesses for video of Read driving on Washington Street back to Meadows. The mishandling of available video, including the library video (which appears to have manipulated) and all of the sallyport video insanity addressed in the video above.

The failure to document the accurate time the Read vehicle was loaded onto the tow truck in Dighton. The failure to photograph the condition of the taillight before it was loaded onto a tow truck. In a blizzard no less, when an accident along the way was possible. The failure to bring the Read car to one of the much closer State Police barracks as was protocol, but to instead bring it back to Canton PD, which was just a little over a mile from the crime scene.

Michael Proctor. Aside from his over-the-top bad and totally unprofessional behavior, why weren't John's clothes logged into evidence for weeks? Whether one believes he was hit by a car or not, these items should have been treated with the utmost care. The failure of Proctor to properly photograph and document the "found" taillight pieces at the scene. Just useless close ups with no placement context.

Now we learn that the CW had video of Brian Higgins - a key player here - returning to the Canton police around 1:30 am and talking on the phone to someone. Not butt dialing. But they didn't share or even preserve it.

This isn't even a fully comprehensive list, because I have to stop typing now. But this is not how the justice system is supposed to work, and shame, once again, on Judge Cannone for not seeing and acting on this.
 
Interesting how he thinks the judge will make the CW pay for Read's expert while Mark Bederow, one of Aidan Kearney's attorneys, thinks there is no chance in hell she'd ever go there. Neither regularly practice in MA though.
^^rsbm

I never heard that expressed by MB but that the Motion to recover expert witness costs is definitely a placeholder (per footnote 1 of Motion) most likely leading to an evidentiary hearing prior to trial to outline this latest issue by the CW and further show how they did not preserve evidence, destroyed, edited, tampered, and/or withheld evidence. IMO, the big question is if Prosecutor Lally would actually be called to testify during a hearing or fight his subpoena.

Footnote from the KR 1/23/25 defense Motion:

1737834913774.png
1737835081433.png
While I don't expect the Court will dismiss this case, MB sums up the issues that should force an evidentiary hearing before trial at minutes 34:00 to 44:00 of the YT:


1/25/25
 
The anticipated upcoming Motion to Dismiss has me on the edge of my seat. Per Bederow in @Seattle1 post above, this will be the 'Haymaker' punch as compared to the last motion, a mere jab.

How any judge could continuously 'allow' tainted and mis-managed evidence into a trial is beyond me. The video (s) were given to the defense in Discovery in the first trial, yet somehow miraculously or suspiciously not all of it was given...
When asked during the trial when the mysterious inverted video showed up, the judge called a side-bah.....and it was subsequently all allowed in as evidence. Was a motion to dismiss brought up during that side-bah? One wonders...

Now we have additional mysterious video ( Higgins on the phone) added to the " Sure...you can send someone to look at the video"..." What video"?..." We don't have any video" evidence. It's mind boggling. Who says sure, this is all ok? What is in the water over there?

This case is a pure travesty of justice, IMO It should have never gone to trial, and certainly not a second time.
 
The anticipated upcoming Motion to Dismiss has me on the edge of my seat. Per Bederow in @Seattle1 post above, this will be the 'Haymaker' punch as compared to the last motion, a mere jab.

How any judge could continuously 'allow' tainted and mis-managed evidence into a trial is beyond me. The video (s) were given to the defense in Discovery in the first trial, yet somehow miraculously or suspiciously not all of it was given...
When asked during the trial when the mysterious inverted video showed up, the judge called a side-bah.....and it was subsequently all allowed in as evidence. Was a motion to dismiss brought up during that side-bah? One wonders...

Now we have additional mysterious video ( Higgins on the phone) added to the " Sure...you can send someone to look at the video"..." What video"?..." We don't have any video" evidence. It's mind boggling. Who says sure, this is all ok? What is in the water over there?

This case is a pure travesty of justice, IMO It should have never gone to trial, and certainly not a second time.
Horrifying.
 
KR defence daily breakdown....
what mud sticks today?

yesterday.....
Miss scarlett...dagger....diningroom!

today....
Mrs white.....revolver....hall!!

tomorrow.....
mrs peacock.....kitchen.....candlestick!!!!

Prosecution....
yesterday KR....
today KR....
tomorrow KR......



MY OPINION ONLY.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IDK
Call me anal retentive or OCD but I can't get my mind around crtain things that to me as a juror would make sense or I could invision. Unless I dreamed this, JOK body was found by the flagpole?? but driveway and entrance to house was on the opposite side of yard to where KR supposedly ran over him?? What am I missing?? If anyone has the time set me straight on this, please. And then there's the dog bites/scratches to prove JOK made it to where the dog was and that is in the house
I get lost in and with the legal wranglings but these two things bother me still. TIA
 
Call me anal retentive or OCD but I can't get my mind around crtain things that to me as a juror would make sense or I could invision. Unless I dreamed this, JOK body was found by the flagpole?? but driveway and entrance to house was on the opposite side of yard to where KR supposedly ran over him?? What am I missing?? If anyone has the time set me straight on this, please. And then there's the dog bites/scratches to prove JOK made it to where the dog was and that is in the house
I get lost in and with the legal wranglings but these two things bother me still. TIA

It has been alleged (through trial and witnesses), that KR and JOK were both in her car which was parked on the street in front of the home and closer to the flagpole where his body was found. No one saw him exit the vehicle, nor enter the home. The CW alleges that because of this, ( and other magically appearing evidence found in an un-secured crime scene) that KR hit JOK.

As far as the dog goes.....I have nothing. The CPD, MSP and CW chose to ignore the elephant in the room ( or the house). Zero questions about the dog were raised by them, as well as the wounds found on JOK's right arm. The players in the CPD, MSP and CW must not have ever played the game of Clue, because those wounds ( along with his punched up face ) were surely a glaring part of the mystery as to what happened to JOK. IMO

Hope this helps.
 
Call me anal retentive or OCD but I can't get my mind around crtain things that to me as a juror would make sense or I could invision. Unless I dreamed this, JOK body was found by the flagpole?? but driveway and entrance to house was on the opposite side of yard to where KR supposedly ran over him?? What am I missing?? If anyone has the time set me straight on this, please. And then there's the dog bites/scratches to prove JOK made it to where the dog was and that is in the house
I get lost in and with the legal wranglings but these two things bother me still. TIA

Interestingly enough, the CW never addressed how the wounds ended up on his arm until trial. At trial, they tried to say that the broken taillight scratched his arm to cause those wounds.

Honestly, if I were a juror, I could not have gotten past the testimony from the FBI stating that OJO didn't die from being hit by a car!
 

DNASolves

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
767
Total visitors
855

Forum statistics

Threads
616,355
Messages
18,349,153
Members
237,028
Latest member
Jlcisler
Back
Top