MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The amount of Trooper Paul speculation was crazy, and there were a bunch of times he had one of his graphs or charts or him talking about accidents and I didn't notice him factor in the snow or ice, who cares about pedal pressure maybe she was slipping on snow or ice

I do not think this is going to go well for the CW on cross, he couldn't even keep his composure when AJ was questioning him about a new opinion they hadn't heard till then, wait till he gets to cross him on what they've prepared
 
I have watched alot of trials over the years. Never have I seen the prosecution spend 95% of their CIC on defending their witnesses, and their case.

I have seen some defense attorneys come up with some wild and bogus stories trying to attempt to dissuade the states case. Such as cows in a field kicking evidence around, chocolate Easter bunnies transferring DNA to name a few.
The prosecution just subtly laughs at these stories, and moves steadily along.

KR's defense in this case has such compelling VALIDITY to it. The CW should never have proceeded with it, and they are looking more and more foolish by the minute by defending their case instead of proving it.

Judge Bev is goin' to the beach ya'll.

See you on Monday !
 
I agree with the judge, didn't see the tire move.


Defense's video is the first time I saw the tire move. Assumed reason is because you are told to focus on the tire, plus that video featured the tire. Must be two different videos?????? idk moo


What a look AJ gave Trooper as he is leaving the witness stand.
I was in awe a the glare from him to Paul and Paul's 'take that!' curt nod.
 
I was in awe a the glare from him to Paul and Paul's 'take that!' curt nod.
I saw the tire move forward very clearly when she backed into the corner of his car on the video. I did NOT see the vid that was shown in today's testimony. I will hope it's here to see it. THEN I will know the one seen today is a fake and doctored along with everyone else that has seen the vid that does show the tire go forward. It goes forward and back.
 
Sorry, I can't go through all the testimony right now. But when I click on your link I can see that's not the correct scientist. Ashley Vallier did the matching of the taillight pieces. It was Christina Hanley who did the glass analysis.

edit - here's a recap where Hanley discusses using lab equipment to measure the refractive index of the glass. I'm pretty sure she talked about the chemical composition as well.

Some of the pieces of glass were a physical match, meaning they physically fit together, she said, and some had the same refractive characteristics as measured by laboratory equipment. Hanley said this indicated they came from the same source, or different sources with the same characteristics.

You were right- the analysts did do fluorescence and refractive index testing (which is a kind of chemical testing and physical testing). Her conclusions were that glass items in the road matched the drinking glass and other glass in road matched glass on the bumper but that the bumper glass and drinking glass do not match by that method.

 
I saw the tire move forward very clearly when she backed into the corner of his car on the video. I did NOT see the vid that was shown in today's testimony. I will hope it's here to see it. THEN I will know the one seen today is a fake and doctored along with everyone else that has seen the vid that does show the tire go forward. It goes forward and back.
It's a shoddy video that the cw has been passing off. To me it looks like it ends before the hit and it is very dark.JMO
 
You were right- the analysts did do fluorescence and refractive index testing (which is a kind of chemical testing and physical testing). Her conclusions were that glass items in the road matched the drinking glass and other glass in road matched glass on the bumper but that the bumper glass and drinking glass do not match by that method.


Thanks for confirming. I thought I'd have to go back and re-listen to the world's most boring expert testimony. (Seriously, if boring testimony was an Olympic sport, she could win the gold medal.)
 
It's a shoddy video that the cw has been passing off. To me it looks like it ends before the hit and it is very dark.JMO
OK, because the one I saw, that was being detailed and explained, was by an older and thin man on probably a utube court tv or something. He explained why the tire went forward and back as it did due to the point of contact by her SUV. It was a clear video image though snowy. WHAT can be done about this, I was raged when I heard Judge say she didn't see it move either. SHE BETTER of seen another one as well.
 
Did anyone catch what he said about Berla and why he did not use that? I heard him mention it but had a hard time understanding him.

start at 10 minutes, I think..

ETA link to appropriate post
 
I saw the tire move forward very clearly when she backed into the corner of his car on the video. I did NOT see the vid that was shown in today's testimony. I will hope it's here to see it. THEN I will know the one seen today is a fake and doctored along with everyone else that has seen the vid that does show the tire go forward. It goes forward and back.
I posted it. with the time in Voir Dire, starting 0-11 approx from memory
 
OK, because the one I saw, that was being detailed and explained, was by an older and thin man on probably a utube court tv or something. He explained why the tire went forward and back as it did due to the point of contact by her SUV. It was a clear video image though snowy. WHAT can be done about this, I was raged when I heard Judge say she didn't see it move either. SHE BETTER of seen another one as well.
if you are on a computer put it on full screen and you can clearly see the movement
 
I’ve seen posters mention that her car should be equipped with sensors that automatically engage the brakes when coming close to backing into something. My own car has this, it comes to a jerky stop. But then KR’s car should’ve stopped her from backing into JO’s car. And we know her car absolutely made contact with his — evident in the video.

Perhaps it won’t auto-brake when going at a super slow speed like how she was in the driveway? I’m very curious about this

And I really don’t understand about her backing up so many feet. I think today left me even more confused surrounding the movement of her car that night.
Correct on the speed.
 
I posted it. with the time in Voir Dire, starting 0-11 approx from memory
This does not show that tire clearly as the one that was shown around previous to this one. I saw a close up as the man was pointing out the move forward and back. I bet Lally and co. saw the one I saw too and someone said let's do something about this. DISGUSTING, as the clear one was seen by tons of people I'm sure and hope. Bev has to know or be told and see 'the other one'.
 
Anyone noticed how keen the CW are to analyse the possible taillight damage (or lack thereof) from the tap on John's car outside his house... but they've avoided talking about the taillight damage (or lack thereof) on the actual alleged murder incident like the plague!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
174
Guests online
1,999
Total visitors
2,173

Forum statistics

Threads
600,418
Messages
18,108,457
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top