MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah I am also. I’m definitely not on board with the dog bites. They are abrasions, not bites. That’s what I see…..
If you're talking about his arm wounds, I totally disagree. From what the pics showed, those aren't abrasions. Abrasions are scrapes, NOT cuts (AKA lacerations), and not punctures. That doesn't mean all abrasions are minor, like a skinned knee; there can be severe abrasions, but these aren't that.

They're lacerations, I believe. Cuts. They might be puncture wounds, but I don't picture puncture wounds as being dragged like those, more like an injury from something poking, gouging, or plunging in thru the skin (including bullet wounds), but not "dragged" like his look to be. I think these would be called lacerations by doctors.

There's also something called avulsions, and here's a definition:
  • Avulsion occurs when there is a partial or complete tearing away of the skin and the tissue beneath. Avulsions typically occur during violent accidents.

but I'm not familiar with that term, and I can't tell by this definition if this would qualify as that or not. But I feel good about calling them lacerations.

That definition above came from Wounds (abrasions, lacerations, puncture, or avulsions) | Catawba Valley Healthcare

and here's the rest of that section for context:

There are basically four types of open wounds:
  • Abrasion occurs when your skin scrapes against a rough or hard surface.
  • A laceration is a deep cut or tearing of your skin by items such as knives, tools, or machinery. If deep, bleeding can be rapid and heavy.
  • A puncture is a small hole caused by a pointy object like a nail, needle, or bullet (bullet puncture). When deep, punctures can damage internal organs.
  • Avulsion occurs when there is a partial or complete tearing away of the skin and the tissue beneath. Avulsions typically occur during violent accidents.
This obviously isn't my field so corrections welcomed, but AFAIK, this is all correct! :)
 
I’ve wondered if one considered KR hit him, what about the tailpipe? Now I’m sure the vehicle was looked at, but if one was laying covering their face etc, might be the arm scratches or the curved head wound . IDK, something I’ve considered.

I don't think any of his injuries are from a tailpipe. The car had been running for at least 15 minutes so touching the exhaust pipe would result in 2nd or 3rd degree burns.

I think if the wounds had been from something on the SUV it would have been figured out by now. The spacing and unique patterns of the lacerations on his arm would have matched up with something on the underside of the Lexus and someone would have made the connection.

The gash in the back of his head is a complete mystery to me. Although IMO the arm injury looks as if it comes from an animal, either from bites or claw marks, But I'm very curious to hear what the experts say.
 
Oh to see that sweatshirt. Answers a lot, but only a piece of it, don't know what part really, a square, was sent by Proctor I believe, to a lab, where 'it' came back with no dog dna, but pig DNA. That shirt was on the floor of the ambulance, hospital places like that it sounds.
Yeah, that didn't sound right, the way they DNA tested to see if any dog DNA present. The expert said they tested his shirt. Shouldn't they have tested the wounds?

How did they test from his shirt? Did they have the whole shirt and look for dog DNA all over the entire garment? Or were they sent only a swatch from his shirt? And if so, was it from his right sleeve or elsewhere on the shirt?

Wouldn't these things matter?? Wouldn't you get different results depending on if you tested the right sleeve as opposed to if you tested, say, the collar or the hem or front pocket area? Wouldn't you need to search the entire shirt for canine DNA to be able to say no dog DNA? And even then, all you can say is no dog DNA found on his shirt! There was more to this man than his shirt. I don't know how their witness seemed comfortable saying there was no dog DNA. Was she even asked to be more specific, like say "no dog DNA on the square inch of fabric we tested, but we can't say whether there was any dog DNA on things we did not test, which was everything else."

I wonder if they could ever find his missing shoe, whether they would find any dog DNA on that.

Also, did they do any testing or investigating whatsoever on his various wounds, to try to see if they could match them up with things at the scene? Just do some process of elimination, see what's left. Like, I don't know, those arm wounds look like a great place to try this on. They look to me like they were made by a pretty sharp object. So shouldn't they be able to identify some, if not all, of the objects in the scene that are sharp, and take measurements and whatever else they need to do, to see if they match up, to see if this or that object was capable of making or likely to have made that wound. I mean, there's only so many things it could have been, and I mean not that many!

I guess there's the bar glass. That should be easy enough. And various parts of the Lexus SUV, on it and under it. Maybe that fire hydrant I saw mentioned. What about the snowplow on that Jeep? No cars where I live have a snowplow on them, so no idea what this even looks like, but seems like it would be kind of sharp? What else?

I don't know, I wasn't there, but other people were, and all they'd have to do is be there and look around them and test the sharp things in the vicinity. They could have done that at the time anyway. Then apply the same thinking to his back of the head wound next. Not just any ol' thing is capable of causing any particular wound. Just identify the possibilities at least! I don't think they did any of that. They have never seen anything but KR's vehicle as a possible cause of any of his injuries. Even tho no one thinks that's possible!
 
If you went out drinking with your partner and you left them at their friend's place wouldn't you think that they passed out on their couch? I wouldn't jump right away to 'something happened'. What was the plan when she dropped him off? Was he supposed to call her to come pick him up? Was one of his friends supposed to drive him home? We haven't heard. Because I don't think there was a plan.

I think everyone was drinking, KR was impaired (along with everyone else). They get to BA's house. KR doesn't want to go in because BH is there (jeep in the driveway) and she knows she had started something with him making things weird. She gets into an argument with JO and tells him to GTFO of the car or he tells her to pound sand.

A few hours later KR wakes up on the couch, still drunk, remembers the spat and 'something happened' when JO got out of the car. Starts freaking out, wakes people up, makes calls, heads out to go look for JO. I think she hit him. Did she mean to kill him? No. However she was impaired.

Why all the suspicious testimony? A group of people that should know better were all drinking and driving that night. That's illegal and they could have all lost their jobs (the ones driving). There's probably a lot of messages back and forth and calls between everyone that was at that house that night. i.e. self serving to cover for the drinking and driving and then having somebody killed in front of the house and laying dead on the lawn. They all went into self preservation mode and by doing so they prevented their 'friend' JO from having the justice he deserves. Don't even get me started on the terrible police work. They seem incompetent and lazy.
Not sure how they could've lost their jobs when there was no proof of their BAC at time of their driving. I think the testimony was very clear on the variations across persons in terms of the rate of metabolizing alcohol. They are backed by a union. Actual proof would have been required.
 
Had this been an ethical and professional defense team they would’ve advised/urged/pushed KR to go with a manslaughter defense. I don’t know if they did or not obv. They could’ve credibly argued that the couple’s relationship was in trouble and nearing its end, and they were fighting a lot. They had been drinking and fought on the way to the house. KR accidentally hit John, panicked and went home. Then came back. Now…..there are hurdles with this defense to be sure because I think the evidence shows she *intentionally* ran him over. But this defense would’ve been her best shot at not doing 25 to life.

I suspect, however, that she has refused to acknowledge any culpability for John’s death to her lawyers and it was her decision to go on the offensive and blame his friends/victims. This is a win-win for the lawyers because these types of underhanded and disgraceful tactics are sensationalized by CourtTV and the like, who give these defense lawyers breathless coverage. Everyone gets paid by the sensationalism. KR will be in an orange jumpsuit soon enough and will spend the rest of her life in prison, where she belongs no doubt.

JMO
Why did Jen McCabe google “how long to freeze to death” (or similar) hours before the body was found?
 
Had this been an ethical and professional defense team they would’ve advised/urged/pushed KR to go with a manslaughter defense. I don’t know if they did or not obv. They could’ve credibly argued that the couple’s relationship was in trouble and nearing its end, and they were fighting a lot. They had been drinking and fought on the way to the house. KR accidentally hit John, panicked and went home. Then came back. Now…..there are hurdles with this defense to be sure because I think the evidence shows she *intentionally* ran him over. But this defense would’ve been her best shot at not doing 25 to life.

I suspect, however, that she has refused to acknowledge any culpability for John’s death to her lawyers and it was her decision to go on the offensive and blame his friends/victims. This is a win-win for the lawyers because these types of underhanded and disgraceful tactics are sensationalized by CourtTV and the like, who give these defense lawyers breathless coverage. Everyone gets paid by the sensationalism. KR will be in an orange jumpsuit soon enough and will spend the rest of her life in prison, where she belongs no doubt.

JMO
Also, why would the defense encourage her to go with a manslaughter defense when the FBI says her vehicle damage isn’t consistent with running someone over and his injuries aren’t consistent with being hit by a vehicle? I am confused as to why you think it would be reasonable for them to recommend this to KR.
 
I found the drops off blood around him interesting, ones they collected in cups. I could only come up with maybe it was dripping off KR when she tried to give him mouth to mouth.
It will be interesting to hear the full autopsy report in court. Just thinking maybe the drops were in the snow after moving him …..
There's testimony that blood came out of his nose or mouth (can't remember which, or both) when KR was trying to revive him, JMc may also have testified to that from memory and if she did I'd believe her on that one as supported by the more credible KerryR, anyway don't now if that would have any relevance?
 
The thing about the Brian Albert / Brian Higgins near-simultaneous butt dials is that the calls were answered. But unlike your girlfriend, the recipients claim no one called them.

And then in all likelihood John was dead when Jen McCabe was butt dialing him. But her calls never went to voicemail so she was both butt dialing and butt hanging up.

Believable? You be the judge.
And if you take her ridiculous jmo testimony literately, she was also butt texting simultaneously (with that super agile butt of hers; appears to be the only reasonable/rational (not) underlying premise haha) moo
 
How is the defendant "coming off so smug?"

As in defense tactics? I mean, she has scientific expert witnesses who will testify, is that smug?

Or are we once again attacking KR's appearance, because there is no evidence that she is guilty?
Yes I was about to ask that! but actually seems it is probably just opinion of the op, jmo
 
Agreed! To even get on base as a guest, a military service member stationed on base has to submit a notice/request, which needs to be approved. The gate guards have a list and you need to show ID! Cut through the D Attorney has not made many missteps, however should have been all over that.
Yes, I was a little disappointed BH wasn't grilled more but I think it's possible D was restricted somewhat by Judge re lines of questioning, but probably yeah wouldn't account for this and D missed it. If so, disappointing missed opportunity. Personal observation and supposition only is that BH could be quite the credible liar jmo, to me he adopted an appearance of sincereity but underneathe that did not sound honest. moo
 
I really can't figure out what happened, with the mess they made of this investigation mainly, and I definitely think KR will not be found guilty of murder nor should she be, but I have to say there is a problem with your scenario imo.

If the people in the house in any way brought an unconscious or incapacitated or dead JO outside to leave him on the lawn for whatever reason, there would be evidence of that, wouldn't there be??

Drag marks mostly, I have to assume. I suppose 2 men could have carried him out without JO touching the ground, but that would have been a struggle with JO weighing 220, plus snow had already been falling for some time, so if not drag marks, there would have to be obvious footprints. Obvious in the way that an investigation would have shown prints of 2 men, and I think a REAL investigation could even surmise that they were carrying a heavy load by scrutinizing the tracks. Even if they just kicked him out of the house by shoving him out a door, JO's stumbling footprints would still be seen.

So I think that he died pretty much where they found him, or they could have seen anything otherwise.

I can't remember exactly all the times everybody said they came and left, and a lot of them were approximate anyway, so it's hard to say, but I think it's possible that JO was hit by a vehicle, but not necessarily KR's. She wasn't the only one coming and/or going during this time span.

And it seems a more likely vehicle to hit him, considering the weird injuries he had, would be the one with the (sharper-edged?) plow attached, BH's Jeep. He came or left around the time JO got there, especially if JO, in his drunkenness, for whatever reason, stumbled around outside for a bit before going inside.

There was vomit on him, so maybe he got out of KR's vehicle and didn't go right in because he had to throw up first, which he would have done outside, of course. They should have seen evidence of that near the curb probably, but I don't think their investigation was even that thorough. But his injuries would be different if he was hit by a car while standing, which is hard to believe, because why would he just be standing there as a car came at him, as opposed to if he was hit by a vehicle while double over throwing up at the side of the road on the lawn, which is where he was dropped off. Which would also make it hard for KR to see him after he got out, if he was leaning over throwing up, out of her view.
Like your theory. And the vomit scenario is one I hadn't considered before and imo is plausible. I'm also interested in jeep/plow scenarios but really trying to restrain the direction my thoughts are taking until more testimony; autopsy/ME, acccident reconstruction. As I've posted before the only thing I'm sure of now is that KR and her lexus aren't responsible and the investigation was a complete joke fueled by tunnel vision and probably corrupt bias (as you say which other vehicles were examined? precisely zero it seems). moo
 
Plenty of discussion on that issue in previous posts you may want to read. Or maybe some new posters would like to participate.
I'm done with it, all anyone needs to know is that tail light in question is not missing FORTY FIVE shards, but on the contrary is shining normally and appears completely intact. moo
 
Still can't picture it but that's fine.
The cw is not offering that as the way it happenned as far as I'm aware? Also KR's car was impounded and though this investigation is a complete dog's breakfast, it's hard for me to believe lexus under carriage was not analysed? Waiting for accident reconstruction but will be surprised if this is part of it. Certainly if there was evidence of that then I truly believe it would have been included in the prelim but no it wasn't IIuc. jmo
 
I dont think that a juror looking at the undercarraige of the car, is a good sign for KR defense.
Well idk, could be great for defense if juror saw no damage which is what I would expect moo given the cw case isn't that KR ran him over IIUC but rather that she reversed into him at 24 mph. jmo

eta and to be clear I don't believe juror would have seen damage because I don't believe lexus either hit or ran over JO. moo
 
Yes, I was a little disappointed BH wasn't grilled more but I think it's possible D was restricted somewhat by Judge re lines of questioning, but probably yeah wouldn't account for this and D missed it. If so, disappointing missed opportunity. Personal observation and supposition only is that BH could be quite the credible liar jmo, to me he adopted an appearance of sincereity but underneathe that did not sound honest. moo
Agree. But I’d say that about all of them ONLY while being interviewed by CW. Then while being interviewed by defense, is when ALL of their true lack of character (lying, omitting) was revealed. They seemed sincere whilst giving their sanitized, often untrue, version of events.

A couple days ago I mentioned how odd it was that BA would go to a fellow LE officers funeral in another state (whose he didn’t even know!), but couldn’t walk outside his house to render aid/respect to JOK. I didn’t know they (any of them!!!) didn’t go to JOKs funeral! How did I miss that? BA and BH just drove to NY for a stranger’s funeral but didn’t go to JOKs? What the …………?
 
Oh to see that sweatshirt. Answers a lot, but only a piece of it, don't know what part really, a square, was sent by Proctor I believe, to a lab, where 'it' came back with no dog dna, but pig DNA. That shirt was on the floor of the ambulance, hospital places like that it sounds.
None of the shirt was sent away. If you heard the testimony of the scientist from the Vet Lab, she was very explicit about that. She said that she only received swabs from the state police lab. The swabs were rubbed along the clothing to get any DNA to transfer onto them. In fact, she went into a great deal of detail on the proper way that a swab had to be prepared, how it had to be applied to the clothing and how it had to be packaged for shipping.

As of yet there's been no testimony on how the swabs were prepared and packaged nor on what parts of John's clothing were swabbed.

And I don't mean to single you out @keek. I'm not sure if you actually heard the lab scientist testify or you're just relaying what you heard second-hand. But I do find it interesting how scientific evidence is often not understood and I wonder how much the jury pays attention to what is actually said. I think often people aren't that attentive and then make up in their head what they think was said.
 
I'm done with it, all anyone needs to know is that tail light in question is not missing FORTY FIVE shards, but on the contrary is shining normally and appears completely intact. moo

Just having the taillight break into 45 pieces seems odd. In my experience they tend to break into a few large jagged shards, not into tiny pieces.

Tempered glass on the other hand does break into tiny pieces, but it's purposefully designed that way. It's used in situations (like windshields) where regular annealed glass, is too dangerous to use. There's no reason to have "safety taillights" so I don't know why it would be engineered to break apart that way.

I'm hoping we get to see the taillight pieces soon.
 
Yeah, that didn't sound right, the way they DNA tested to see if any dog DNA present. The expert said they tested his shirt. Shouldn't they have tested the wounds?

How did they test from his shirt? Did they have the whole shirt and look for dog DNA all over the entire garment? Or were they sent only a swatch from his shirt? And if so, was it from his right sleeve or elsewhere on the shirt?

Wouldn't these things matter?? Wouldn't you get different results depending on if you tested the right sleeve as opposed to if you tested, say, the collar or the hem or front pocket area? Wouldn't you need to search the entire shirt for canine DNA to be able to say no dog DNA? And even then, all you can say is no dog DNA found on his shirt! There was more to this man than his shirt. I don't know how their witness seemed comfortable saying there was no dog DNA. Was she even asked to be more specific, like say "no dog DNA on the square inch of fabric we tested, but we can't say whether there was any dog DNA on things we did not test, which was everything else."

I wonder if they could ever find his missing shoe, whether they would find any dog DNA on that.

Also, did they do any testing or investigating whatsoever on his various wounds, to try to see if they could match them up with things at the scene? Just do some process of elimination, see what's left. Like, I don't know, those arm wounds look like a great place to try this on. They look to me like they were made by a pretty sharp object. So shouldn't they be able to identify some, if not all, of the objects in the scene that are sharp, and take measurements and whatever else they need to do, to see if they match up, to see if this or that object was capable of making or likely to have made that wound. I mean, there's only so many things it could have been, and I mean not that many!

I guess there's the bar glass. That should be easy enough. And various parts of the Lexus SUV, on it and under it. Maybe that fire hydrant I saw mentioned. What about the snowplow on that Jeep? No cars where I live have a snowplow on them, so no idea what this even looks like, but seems like it would be kind of sharp? What else?

I don't know, I wasn't there, but other people were, and all they'd have to do is be there and look around them and test the sharp things in the vicinity. They could have done that at the time anyway. Then apply the same thinking to his back of the head wound next. Not just any ol' thing is capable of causing any particular wound. Just identify the possibilities at least! I don't think they did any of that. They have never seen anything but KR's vehicle as a possible cause of any of his injuries. Even tho no one thinks that's possible!
100 percent to all that. I really need to hear the Medical Examiner's testimony to understand what went down, and if wounds were not tested/swabbed analysed, why not? And as you say, especially regarding the arm wounds, were they swabbed/samples taken? If yes then question becomes why not sent to animal dna specialist if only for elimination purposes (ie that is on Proctor?)?. If the answer is No, why not? I don't really have a competent grip on how these things work but surely the ME is meant to carry out their work independent of Investigators' priorities ? Which in this case were to investigate KR lexus angle in a blinkered tunnel whilst ignoring any other possible explanantion. IMO

Also it ocurred to me that some evidence that may have been in JO's wounds (eg possible hairs/minute samples of extraneous matter) may have been lost to contamination via ambulance and then treatment at hospital, also contamination of any dna with dna of those working on him? I would hope the jury gets to hear about all that too if that is the case. In all events the CW owes the jury and the public an explanation. Moo
 
When I looked at the arm injuries, my immediate thought was the marks in the middle were from the dog, a quick bite and release, so no tearing. The marks on either side were from the claws.

Last year I got an 18 month old rescue Doberman who loved to play frisbee, but wasn’t very trained. Sometimes instead of waiting until I threw it, he would go for the frisbee in my hand. He definitely left marks like the claw marks on me and a couple of times teeth marks by accident. He is better trained now.

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
298
Guests online
1,089
Total visitors
1,387

Forum statistics

Threads
597,570
Messages
18,066,635
Members
230,392
Latest member
@ttentive
Back
Top