MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #2

[louvillian08]

Chris's testimony was dumb. Yanetti walked him into changing his testimony about Colin's arrival home right before our eyes.

Julie's testimony was just weird. Six donuts. In a blizzard. (we saw how bad things were already getting 1.5 hours earlier on the dashcams). Why not make it a baker's dozen if you're making that trek?
Sees all kinds of vehicles in the driveway, but hell bent just to put the donuts in the birthday boy's car (so they could freeze up nice and cold, I guess). She doesn't want to know what the commotion is all about and is practically dragged into the house by Brian Albert.
Instead of calling her husband to tell him what's going on, after 30 - 45 minutes she drives back home in the blizzard, gets Chris and then they come immediately back to the Albert house.

I think the judge stopping where she did was a gift to the defense. Gives them more time to prepare to deal with this weirdness tomorrow. I'd also like a little clarity about when that call from Jen McCabe actually came in. The early one Julie neither heard nor responded to.

Her original interview with police said that she knew what happened at 4:55am

 

[rrsafety]

Although he legally could not be pronounced so at the scene, he was dead when they got there and I'm sure he looked it from Paul O'Keefe's description of his brother when he saw him a little later in the hospital. Karen asking Jen to ask Google how long it would take him to die in the snow seems a strange request to me. This was at 6:24 so the first responders were there by then. I didn't hear any of them testify that Karen shouted out this internet search request and she could have asked the EMTs instead of have Jen ask Google.

Of course the defense contends the search happened at 2:27 am.

KR was hysterical. If a hysterical woman made this request, you’d ignore it and assume she’s forget she had made it in about 45 seconds. Absurd to think this request was made and then actually followed up on.

 

[Universecalling]

Because they were trying to understand what might have happened to their friend?

The problem here is that she searched that at 2:23 am. 3 hrs before they all claim he was found in the yard…
So you are kinda right… maybe they were trying to understand what might have happened to their “friend”…. Just for very different reasons.

 

[Universecalling]

I just watched the Chris Albert testimony. The difference in his body language and demeanor when is son is introduced into the questioning is palpable and telling. In my opinion he's clearly protecting his son (as any parent might do) for SOMETHING. Not necessarily anything nefarious...it might be something completely innocent and innocuous. But his body language absolutely changes.

I felt that the Defense was stretching a bit when they were going over the fact that JO didn't like people on his lawn until CA couldn't remember who took the photos of he and his wife on JO's property as exhibited in the evidence photos. CA states that they were watching his home while he was out of town but there's nobody to substantiate that.

My take on the photos is that they were taunting...not light hearted. What if Colin Albert, who had ALLEGEDLY run afoul of JO, and his parents were out drinking and thought it was a fun idea to "spit in the eye" of someone who a family member had a prior beef with? Light hearted? Taunting? Who knows?! Without further context or testimony to either confirm or deny the fact that they were watching the property it remains subjective.

Pure speculation on my part...but it caught my brain.

Yea, he went from Caillou to Gargamel real quick.

 

[Yemelyan]

The problem here is that she searched that at 2:23 am. 3 hrs before they all claim he was found in the yard…
So you are kinda right… maybe they were trying to understand what might have happened to their “friend”…. Just for very different reasons.

I think the time she googled it is in contention and I'm interested to hear the evidence for both the earlier and later time.

I think I must be a weirdo because this doesn't seem odd to me at all. Finding out how long it might take for someone to die out in the cold is exactly what I'd want to know if it apparently happened to someone who was supposed to come to a party with me but never showed. What on earth happened? Has he really been out there since 12:30? It's fully possible that I have been a regular on Websleuths for too long and something has warped me, though.

 

[Universecalling]

I think the time she googled it is in contention and I'm interested to hear the evidence for both the earlier and later time.

I think I must be a weirdo because this doesn't seem odd to me at all. Finding out how long it might take for someone to die out in the cold is exactly what I'd want to know if it apparently happened to someone who was supposed to come to a party with me but never showed. What on earth happened? Has he really been out there since 12:30? It's fully possible that I have been a regular on Websleuths for too long and something has warped me, though.

I don’t think you’re a weirdo. I just think JM comes off as a mean girl, who likes to have her tentacles everywhere. Her name pops up in the most crucial moments of this investigation.
I think her and other wives had some envy of Karen.
You can almost see the hierarchy among the mean girls, but I think they all secretly wished they were as successful and independent like K.
Mean girls’ identities seems to be to be attached to their husbands’.
Jmo

 

[HarmonyE.]

I think the time she googled it is in contention and I'm interested to hear the evidence for both the earlier and later time.

I think I must be a weirdo because this doesn't seem odd to me at all. Finding out how long it might take for someone to die out in the cold is exactly what I'd want to know if it apparently happened to someone who was supposed to come to a party with me but never showed. What on earth happened? Has he really been out there since 12:30? It's fully possible that I have been a regular on Websleuths for too long and something has warped me, though.

I'm not sure who wins the battle of the search experts but I do think it's a very odd question for 6:24 given all that had happened and was going on at the time. Maybe it would be more believable to me if Karen asked 20 minutes earlier when he was found, I don't know. But it is also worded strangely. Why how long to die? Wouldn't "how long can you survive...." be the more likely question a hopeful person would ask?

 

[HarmonyE.]

I think her and other wives had some envy of Karen.
You can almost see the hierarchy among the mean girls, but I think they all secretly wished they were as successful and independent like K.
Mean girls’ identities seems to be to be attached to their husbands’.

Agree completely, although I don't think that's why she's being framed. But I do hear it in some of the blatantly sexist posts out here. I don't like her. Look at her mouth, such an attitude. Designer clothes. She should be more humble. Who does she think she is, conferring with her lawyers like she's an attorney. She's just a psycho. John was probably her last chance to snag a husband and he was dumping her so she decided to kill him.
It's appalling to me.

 

[maamager]

Agree completely, although I don't think that's why she's being framed. But I do hear it in some of the blatantly sexist posts out here. I don't like her. Look at her mouth, such an attitude. Designer clothes. She should be more humble. Who does she think she is, conferring with her lawyers like she's an attorney. She's just a psycho. John was probably her last chance to snag a husband and he was dumping her so she decided to kill him.
It's appalling to me.

yup you nailed it. 100% agreed. it seems that they so badly want KR to be a shrinking violet but she’s coming out swinging as an advocate for her defense. MOO here for this next bit — it’s non debatable that there is corruption in this investigation. whether it’s a coverup remains to be determined

the tenacity that alienated KR from the group is the same that will ultimately acquit KR.

 

[DeDee]

I just watched the Chris Albert testimony. The difference in his body language and demeanor when is son is introduced into the questioning is palpable and telling. In my opinion he's clearly protecting his son (as any parent might do) for SOMETHING. Not necessarily anything nefarious...it might be something completely innocent and innocuous. But his body language absolutely changes.

I think Chris Albert told the truth. He knows the Defense if trying to pin John's death on his son so certainly, he is in a position to defend him. Besides, there was no motive for Colin.

I felt that the Defense was stretching a bit when they were going over the fact that JO didn't like people on his lawn until CA couldn't remember who took the photos of he and his wife on JO's property as exhibited in the evidence photos. CA states that they were watching his home while he was out of town but there's nobody to substantiate that.

John installing a white wooden picket fence around his yard might be a clue as to how he felt about his lawn being used as a cut-through. He made a sarcastic remark to DA, Chris' youngest son, then apologized with a sack of candy. If the photo evidence needed verification, then it could be aligned with one of John's out of town trips or via texts but the Defense didn't quibble over it.

My take on the photos is that they were taunting...not light hearted. What if Colin Albert, who had ALLEGEDLY run afoul of JO,

We learned today that it wasn't that John had a beef with Colin over beer cans in the bushes. It was DA, the youngest, who had run through John's yard as a short cut to where he was going. Do it frequently, and there'd be a worn path. I don't think DA was the only neighborhood child/person that cut through John's yard. His home was the first lot, the corner lot, on the street. Hence, John went with a fence.

and his parents were out drinking and thought it was a fun idea to "spit in the eye" of someone who a family member had a prior beef with? Light hearted? Taunting? Who knows?! Without further context or testimony to either confirm or deny the fact that they were watching the property it remains subjective.

My guess is def light-heartedness. They were teasing him, ribbing him. Can't you tell by their testimony that this group is into saying funny stuff to one another? If it cuts deep to a weakness, the more effective it is. It is all in fun. These people do not appear to have any prejudices against anyone.

There was no plan to murder John Oliver on this night or any other. Until we see the telematics on her car's activities, I'm leaning on a theory that she hit him on accident. She regretted it and tried mouth to mouth but it was too late. She panicked, then went into a fugue state of hysteria because the fatal event was too much for her mind to grasp. Hence, she made all of the confessions.

Pure speculation on my part...but it caught my brain.

MOO

 

[sunspun]

There was no plan to murder John Oliver on this night or any other.

I'm sure John Oliver is glad to know that.

That's the 2nd time I've seen that name mixup here on this thread... or was that you the other time too? ;-)

 

[ch_13]

So we're almost two weeks into this trial. Supposedly we're halfway through the prosecution's case. And yet we have no idea what happened between the time KR and JO left the Waterfall Bar at midnight and when JO's body was discovered at just after 6 AM.

We know plenty about what happened the night before: It seems they had a fair amount to drink but were having a good time. They were last seen acting "lovey-dovey" as they headed to her car.

And we know what occurred afterwards: KR was distraught and hysterical. Yelling things and eventually getting sectioned. Supposedly she screamed "I hit him" but only some heard her.

But for those key six hours, we know nada. Nothing from the car's data recorder, nothing from any cameras, nothing about JO's wounds, nothing about the damage to KR's car, nothing from any electronic devices.

It doesn't look like Friday will be any more illuminating. Hopefully, we'll get some real evidence next week.

 

[Charlot123]

The prosecution claims Karen was extremely intoxicated, right? Why do all their witnesses keep testifying she didn't seem intoxicated?

JMO, if they say she was intoxicated, the defense could pull out the amount each of them drank, and then they'll have to admit that they, too were driving home drunk. To avoid it, they resort to "field sobriety version", i.e., "KR walked straight, spoke coherently, got into the car without hitting the door. So did we all. We drove home sober". If the defense has three photo of CA in the bar, they might as well have the video showing who drank, and how much.

 

[ch_13]

JMO, if they say she was intoxicated, the defense could pull out the amount each of them drank, and then they'll have to admit that they, too were driving home drunk. To avoid it, they resort to "field sobriety version", i.e., "KR walked straight, spoke coherently, got into the car without hitting the door. So did we all. We drove home sober". If the defense has three photo of CA in the bar, they might as well have the video showing who drank, and how much.

Many of the witnesses have already testified how much they drank. I believe one man said he had six beers. In any case, no one is going to prosecute them for a two year old drunk driving misdemeanor. And I'm sure the statute of limitations has long expired anyways.

Not to mention that one of the those who said KR didn't seem drunk was Karina Kolokithas who was drinking water all night.

It's possible that KR is one of those people who can seem sober even when they're drunk. But it's also possible she wasn't drinking that much. Yannetti alluded to her alternating alcohol with water.

The DA certainly could have introduced receipts showing how much she drank. Or video which they claim they have. They could have asked the bartender who was testifying. But they did none of those for reasons that only Lally knows. Maybe they'll return to it later.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

True, but at that time there just wasn’t that much snow. The prosecution has WAY oversold the snow issue. Granted, by 7am or so it was really coming down but by 6:00am it was only about 4 inches at most.

I see. Yes, they have really oversold the snow issue then.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Many of the witnesses have already testified how much they drank. I believe one man said he had six beers. In any case, no one is going to prosecute them for a two year old drunk driving misdemeanor. And I'm sure the statute of limitations has long expired anyways.

Not to mention that one of the those who said KR didn't seem drunk was Karina Kolokithas who was drinking water all night.

It's possible that KR is one of those people who can seem sober even when they're drunk. But it's also possible she wasn't drinking that much. Yannetti alluded to her alternating alcohol with water.

The DA certainly could have introduced receipts showing how much she drank. Or video which they claim they have. They could have asked the bartender who was testifying. But they did none of those for reasons that only Lally knows. Maybe they'll return to it later.

Interesting your point that even KK, who was drinking water, has testified that KR didn't seem drunk. That should carry quite a bit of weight.

 

[DeDee]

I'm sure John Oliver is glad to know that.

That's the 2nd time I've seen that name mixup here on this thread... or was that you the other time too? ;-)

I feel sure that both times it was my error to misstate the victim's name. I profusely apologize for the mistake. It is a terrible one to make. Clearly, the victim is Officer John O'Keefe. Thank you for graciously calling it to my attention. If it happens again, I'll ban myself from posting here for 3 days.

 

[Universecalling]

I'm not sure who wins the battle of the search experts but I do think it's a very odd question for 6:24 given all that had happened and was going on at the time. Maybe it would be more believable to me if Karen asked 20 minutes earlier when he was found, I don't know. But it is also worded strangely. Why how long to die? Wouldn't "how long can you survive...." be the more likely question a hopeful person would ask?

Agreed.
Knowing what we know so far, defense’s timeline makes more sense to me.
1:30 BH drunk at PD HQ
2:12 JM comes home
2:22 BA calls BH
2:22 BH calls BA back
2:27 JM googles the question (which she later deletes!!!)
2:30 plow driver says no body on the lawn
3:30 plow driver says ford edge parked where JOs body was later found

 

[louvillian08]

I'm not sure who wins the battle of the search experts but I do think it's a very odd question for 6:24 given all that had happened and was going on at the time. Maybe it would be more believable to me if Karen asked 20 minutes earlier when he was found, I don't know. But it is also worded strangely. Why how long to die? Wouldn't "how long can you survive...." be the more likely question a hopeful person would ask?

Very interested to see the experts for this one. Until then, here’s one more piece of info I find interesting about the searches: of the two that happened after 6am the first one was “how long ti die in ckld” at 6:23am. Then after that, at 6:24am she googled “hos long to die in cold” this one is the same typo as the alleged 2:27am search.

Try it yourself, you’ll get the same results on Google no matter which version you type in, Google will assume you meant “how long to die in cold” and show results matching that. So why would she search it the second time at 6:24am if she already have plenty of google results?

 

[waterslyd]

His Apple Health app shows him walking up and down stairs - three flights in total - after Read dropped him off. He didn't have an Apple watch. The prosecution will claim it's not an accurate app and just means Read was driving up and down hills after they left the Waterfall. I don't know of any hills along the 1.7 mile drive, but I also don't know much about the app. Read apparently had an iPhone as well, so I suppose it can be confirmed whether her app shows the same hills.

Aside from this, John's phone is a little bit of a mystery still. I've read it was found under him, as opposed to in a pocket, but we don't know how it got from under him into evidence (weird that Lally didn't ask the cops about this, unless I missed it) or whether it had been turned off or if the battery drained from being in freezing temps. More expert battling I suspect. The defense plans on arguing that O'Keefe was attacked very soon after entering the home, so no milling around according to them.

It is not a particularly hilly area.