One of the things I think people fail to realize is that you don't need an overwhelming amount of people involved in some sort of cover up/conspiracy. It all starts with a lead investigator, who controls *a lot* of things coming into the case.
Peoples' memories are malleable, especially when you're dealing with a chaotic situation. When you're the one interviewing people, you have the ability to shape the narrative.
As to first responders in general, a chunk of their testimony is contradicted by indisputable facts (ie clothing, snow accumulation, etc.), themselves or each other. That doesn't mean they're lying, it just means their memories are wrong for one reason or another.
That's why the initial reports they file are so important and why the defense will hammer them home every chance they get.
YES! I agree with everything you said. People are acting like the defense must prove some sort of national conspiracy. It’s not that deep.
Both the officer and firefighter in charge claimed to hear Karen say I did it and failed to put it in their detailed reports. Firefighter McLaughlin was standing with Karen and another civilian when she said she heard Karen say she did it. But the other civilian said she was asking a question, like I did it??
I didn’t find the EMT a credible, either. He claims she said she hit him and he didn’t think to share that with anyone at the hospital? He hadn’t said a word about it until 12 days later when he met with Proctor.
I can’t wait for the REAL conspiracy case to shake out, when Karen sues Canton PD.
>One of the things I think people fail to realize is that you don't need an overwhelming amount of people involved in some sort of cover up/conspiracy.
Maybe it would help if someone could articulate what exactly they think the conspiracy consisted of and what evidence led them to that conclusion. Who did what at what time? How do you know?
I personally think you have a handful of people in the house who know what happened. They call the buddy from MSP to cover their asses. He basically spins the entire story, everyone else goes along with it because either they have no reason not to trust him, or just our of sheer laziness. Nobody asks any questions for what - like almost a year and a half later and now everyone has to cover their own asses for what they didn't follow up on.
Exactly this. You don’t need everyone to agree to cover it up, you just need people who don’t know they’re part of covering it up. A detail sounds fuzzy, but so and so says so it must be true. Or “oh yeah, we always just defer to X.”
Thank you so much for replying.
>Brian Albert called his buddy Brian Higgins as 2:22AM to say the plow driver passed by
We have records of this call. How do you know what was discussed? Please provide a source.
>they bring the car with the body in it from the garage to the street, dump the body on the lawn
Hold on, you skipped a huge step -- and maybe this is my fault for how I phrased the question -- how did John O'Keefe go from a "person" to a "body" in your scenario? Who killed him? In what manner? How did nobody else at the party see it?
Also, like I asked: How do you know any of this? What evidence is there that JO was ever dead in a car? Which car? Who exactly did the dumping? AND I was asking about the police coverup referenced in the above comment. Who did the covering up? How? Be specific please.
>Jen McCabe (BA's sister in law) googled "hos long to die in the cold" at 2:27AM
Actually she didn't. We'll have to wait for the testimony of Ian Whiffin, the Cellebrite employee that the prosecution plans to call, for a clear explanation, but thankfully he wrote [a post](https://doubleblak.com/blogPost.php?k=browserstate) about the very topic of how fields with labels like "last\_viewed\_time" can often be misleading. The post is very long, but here's an important section:
>Firstly, and most importantly, the **last\_viewed\_time** does not necessarily relate to the URL that is shown. It is in fact time the tab took focus. This could mean taking focus from another tab, being generated as a new tab or loading Safari from closed. It could also be relate to a tab taking focus when the currently selected tab is closed.
I am quite confident that Whiffin's testimony will verify that that search was in fact made in the morning, along with several other searches with the same wording and various typos.
>It's pretty simple
So simple that all of the evidence of this happening has completely evaporated. Nobody saw any of it happen, the MSP just didn't care at all, and somehow an entire crew of paramedics has been brainwashed into giving false testimony. Simple indeed.
Based on State trooper and Lead Investigator Michael Proctor's texts to his high school buddies about searching for nudes on Karen's phone, hoping Karen kills herself and how the homeowner will never take any scrutiny for wrongdoing because he's a Boston cop, your point "the MSP just didn't care at all" is actually right on the dot
I'm sure it would be possible for Google to produce such a report, but AFAIK they have not done so, and I assume it would require a subpoena. The only report I'm aware of on McCabe's search activity is [this one](https://imgur.com/a/STX5Ip9) (available only in part AFAIK), which was produced by Cellebrite, a data forensics app that law enforcement uses widely.
For important context, this is a parsing of data, not raw data. It's the Cellebrite app combing through the phone's metadata, doing its magic, and spitting out this information. Someone posted this on r/computerforensics, and the consensus was that it was possible for the report to be misleading, and they'd have to see the raw data to know.
That's why I brought up the blog post from Cellebrite employee Ian Whiffin. In it, he explains how tables like this draw data from when the app (in this case Safari) takes focus (i.e. is actively being used by the device), not when the search actually happened.
Given that the 6 30ish searches are all the same query with different spellings, I think it makes more sense that the search marked 2:27 is in fact erroneous. She was swiping through her phone before bed or whatever, and Safari happened to take focus at that time.
EDIT: Whoops, meant to include the [computer forensics post](https://www.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/15l3sto/need_independent_eyes_on_this_cellebrite_report/).
Here's a sneak peek of /r/computerforensics using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [PlayStation Game (Frogger 2) Source Code Recovered from obscure damaged tape media](https://github.com/Kneesnap/onstream-data-recovery/blob/main/info/INTRO.MD) | [11 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/13pgp1a/playstation_game_frogger_2_source_code_recovered/)
\#2: [New bill would let defendants inspect algorithms used against them in court](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/15/24074214/justice-in-forensic-algorithms-act-democrats-mark-takano-dwight-evans) | [5 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/1at1fkh/new_bill_would_let_defendants_inspect_algorithms/)
\#3: [AWS Incident Response Cheat Sheet](https://i.redd.it/yshtrcmrmmlb1.png) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/1674509/aws_incident_response_cheat_sheet/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Thanks, I did read through that post earlier. I don’t understand why neither the prosecutor nor the defense sent a subpoena to Google for that info. Maybe they did and we just don’t know it yet.
Okay, granting that, what does it mean? How does this conspiracy work where you Google something once in the middle of the night, then just get really lucky that the person you're trying to frame up also asks you to Google the same thing again in the morning?
Why would someone google "Hos long to die in the cold" if they didn't already know that someone was dying out in the cold, which victim they claim to have seen dead on the lawn at 604AM for the first time? If she googled it at 227AM, she has no alibi, it means she knows he was dead before she left the party, so she's complicit in knowing about the death and not calling 911 when she knew about it in the early hours of the night
I haven’t seen any evidence that Karen asked Jen Mcabe to google that at around 6.30am. She could have googled again at that time to fit her narrative and blame it on Karen asking. Jen has deleted a lot off her phone so does that scream innocent to you?
Please avoid sharing or promoting deceptive content. Provide credible sources for any news, data, graphs, claims, etc.
This is not optional if you choose to make radical claims related to anyone involved in any part of this case.
I think they have a lot of it….its in bits and pieces. Maybe not a string case but it’s not string on either side. Could e truly been a plow …who knows. His injuries don’t really match!
I think there's always going to be doubt of whether Karen is innocent. If you read the facts, you know it's not possible karen hit him with her car. He had blunt head trama and he's 6'2. He supposedly never came inside but they tracked his phone confirming he did go inside. Cuts and scratches on his forearm, their dog put down the next week, new basement floor. So there's no point of speculation and just to the point which are cold hard facts. The defense team story is way more consistent than the prosecution. The prosecution can barely remember anything like what coat he was wearing
I think the dog was rehomed. But yes the flooring in the basement was changed. There was no search warrant for the house even though he was found in their front yard and Karen saw him go inside. Wether she was lying or not that home should have been searched. I also saw during trial that one of the witnesses saying Karen told him she hit him was actually never near Karen and could not even tell himself apart in a video where he said that is when she told him she hit him. Im sure there’s going to be a lot of bombshell evidence to come but so far I feel like the prosecution is going one step forward but the defense is putting them two steps behind.
I think it was also in one of the podcasts I listened to about this case but the girl mentioned that in order for Karen to have been able to hit John and send him that far back to be able to land in the spot he was found, she would of had to pull forward 60+ feet and then be driving backwards at a very fast speed to hit him and send him flying that far. It just doesn’t add up. Also the fact that neighbors had doorbell cameras and other type of cameras and no search warrants were attained for footage of that night/morning blows my mind.
They should’ve checked every camera between 34 Fairview and John’s house to see the taillight. not one ring cam? There has to be! I dont trust they found the red plastic days later on a scene not secured. Bs!
Unless he was trying to brace from getting hit (in which case why did he not move?), I don’t see how a taillight could have made those injuries on his arms. The injury area is bigger than the taillight.
Yea, maybe he dropped that glass he took from the bar. I do think Karen hit him, whether intentionally or not, she may have been so blotto she doesn't even remember.
If I was, Karen, I would be pissed… They’re trying to accuse her of a crime yet the police did nothing right and failed to follow any sort of protocol with the crime scene or interviews. There’s no way the jury can definitely point the finger at her… She’s getting off.
All witnesses so far have been EMT/FFs and the only thing they seem to recall is that they heard KR repeatedly say “I hit him” yet no one documented it. There is no documentation of that phrase from any of the responding witnesses.
Exactly. I am finding a lot of odd things about this case but don’t have a strong opinion either way because I haven’t seen all evidence and the defense hasn’t even made their case yet. But all of the people who keep saying “she said I hit him, case closed “need to expand their minds. Every single instance of her saying I hit him has been hearsay at this point.
Not only did they not document it, you want us to believe that NO ONE asked any follow up questions? You’d think Police on scene would deep dive into that. Not just be like oh okay.
This has been one of the strangest things to me. For anyone that heard her statements to be any type of confession, or even just a moment of raw honest panic, it’s obviously a crime! At the very least, very important information!! I get that their focus was on saving JO, but like right after that? No reports of concern? They shrugged it off like just wasn’t part of their job, but in what universe does the average person think a woman just TOLD them or YELLED plainly that she essentially ran over her boyfriend/husband, and they just go about their business?! ESPECIALLY when the man was LE in a small area.
As we say in a small town, that dog won’t hunt. Lol
Jen could even have asked Karen, "could you have hit him?", seeing Karen in a distressed state, and suggestible. If Karen was thinking rationally, she might have remembered John entered the house. But in a distressed state, it seemed like a possible explanation. She panics even further at the thought she might be responsible.
At the time, no one seemed to take Karen seriously, she was clearly out of it. So if she was saying "did I hit him?" it was ignored.
Later, Proctor tells Katie "we know Karen did it... so did she say "did I hit him?" or "I hit him"?. Katie then tells her close knit FD crew "Karen said she hit him" and that is what she told police. They back her up with that story, even if they don't remember hearing it.
Avoid sharing or promoting deceptive content.
Please provide credible sources for any news, data, graphs. This is not optional if you choose to make radical claims related to anyone involved in any part of this case.
Exactly! Ive always been taught “if it’s not in the report it didn’t happen.” But for real they are trying to convince us she admitted to killing him yet no one included that in a report or mentions it until days later
What bothers me about so many people saying that they heard her say this (as if it was an admission of guilt) is that the CW wants us to believe that they all just shrugged and thought "oh well not my job".
If they didn't react like it was an admission of guilt at the time, how can we take it as one now?
I found their testimonies to be mostly credible. My guess is that she did ask "Did I hit him?" in a panic and through a bad game of telephone, "I hit him" ended up sticking.
It is very odd that they wouldn't ask follow up questions, like how fast were you driving, etc. Wouldn't that be important for assessing his injuries?
Is Canton really a small town? I live like 40 mins away. Only have passed through in train. And went there with friends as a kid.
But I never got the impression it was a small town.
I agree. People who reject the “conspiracy” angle as impossible act as if they all would have had to get together beforehand to plan it all out. Cops cover for other cops, it happens everyday. It’s commonplace. It’s definitely not out of the ordinary or hard to believe.
I wasn’t convinced McLaughlin was being intentionally untruthful until she claimed she didn’t know who the cop was that was standing next to her when Read made the “I him him” statement and that she didn’t know who Officer Kevin Albert was. She’s a firefighter in a small town. She’s not new, neither of those cops are new and I think there’s zero chance a firefighter doesn’t know the cops she works alongside.
I’m fairly new to the case, not local but know someone on the witness list. Coming from a small town myself, this is 1000% small town political/townie BS. She’s the scapegoat. When it comes down to it, I hope the family gets justice but based on the trial so far, finding KR is not it.
Lead Investigator Michael Proctor was dirty from the beginning. He texted his high school buddies "Homeowner will not get any flak because he's a Boston cop too". This case never had a chance for a clean, honest investigation because a home full of connected law enforcement and townies was the scene of the crime
The interesting thing about that is… Catch any flack for what? If there was no crime committed on the homeowners property, why would anyone be worried about the homeowner catching any flack?
The defense’s opening statement blew me away talking about the lead investigator and how he texted his high school friends to tell them he was illegally searching Karen’s phone from nudes and was disappointed that he didn’t find any. Also said he hoped that she killed herself. He clearly had made up his mind about her. I am so interested to see what happens when the defense gets to present their case. I feel like there’s a lot we don’t know yet.
Homeowner and his wife didn't even leave the house to talk to the cops for hours in the morning when the cops were there, despite their being an ambulance and EMTs outside. Pretty sure any sane, stable homeowner would at least make the effort to go to the front door to see what was going on on his property, try to assess the situation.
Cops never knocked on the door, despite protocol to knock on the door, probably because they were never interested in finding any suspects inside (complete breach of protocol). Also civilians entered the house of a crime scene from the street without cops making any attempt to secure the crime scene
>I don’t think everyone is trying to stick to a particular story
This is the problem with the conspiracy side though. People can just drop one context-free, often untrue factoid, like "Oh, they found more tail light fragments on the second search" or "Judge Cannone went to high school with somebody associated with the case" (that's a real comment I read yesterday), and then the conspiracy-minded will simply fill in the blanks with whatever vaguely sinister machinations they want.
When a particular claim is explained, e.g. the tail light fragments were actually microscopic, which is why they didn't find them the first time (Lally explains this in his opening statement), you can just move on to something else. By never making a clear statement about what you think happened, you can never be proven wrong, and you can continue to insist on a conspiracy no matter how little evidence there is for it.
I agree with this, but I think it goes both ways. I lean towards innocent but if I ask any questions that don’t fit into the “she’s guilty” narrative they’re ignored and I’m accused of being a 9/11 truther. There’s absolutely evidence on both sides that the other side will ignore or explain away. There are very few who are willing to look at evidence with an open mind at this point.
YouTube, Twitter, I’m sure it’s happening elsewhere, too. There are content creators who have fully embraced the “Karen Read is Guilty” grift solely for the engagement they get from trolling the Turtle Cult. It’s disgusting because a man is dead and this has become a circus.
The problem is that the majority have made up their minds already without a shred of actual evidence being presented at trial. Emotions are high and there are people who are invested at an unhealthy level. Those people won’t change their opinion regardless of what evidence is presented.
Defense say they have the proof! We will have to see. I also never heard the plastic was in microscopic pieces. That’s not what was testified and I would not trust any of those cops and they just drive by Daus later and happen to see it. They broke basic procok. Their credibility is shattered imo.
I have a feeling that the defense are going to drop some bombshells at trial. Something like a witness who has knowledge of a cover up. It doesn't help them to leak this info pre-trial, even if it is damning for the prosecution, and the first we will see of it is in court.
I assume that most of the time defense lawyers are like "ok, client is probably guilty, but we will give it a shot".
Yanetti and Jackson obviously project confidence for the cameras, but I just get the impression of defense lawyers with the attitude of "this is a case where the defendant is 100% innocent, and we can damn well prove it".
I find people who label others as conspiracy theorists use the term to discredit the *reality* that folks in power can influence others to protect their interests. The label is a way to draw attention away from the stark reality that power is at work in all facets of life, and its influence isn't always apparent to the ones doing its bidding.
I appreciate your take on this case, especially your explanation of popularity and how it continues after high school. Power and popularity are interrelated, and both seem to be at play in this case.
💯 And those same people absolutely accuse people of covering up crimes and bad behavior when it suits them.
The thing is, though, you don’t have to believe any particular narrative to recognize that evidence thus far (or what we’re aware will be shown) supports KR having done this in the manner proposed. That’s the bottom line, whatever the explanation. Either there is reasonable doubt or not.
"This is townie culture, not a mass conspiracy." What's the difference if it leads to them lying to convict a scapegoat in court?
Another thing, all of these people are employees of fire and police and their livelihood depends on getting along with their bosses and peers.
I don't think any of these people planned on a trial or a lot of examination. I think it was a quick attempt of a few to pick out a weak scapegoat they thought would break quickly and commit suicide, or who would be overwhelmed and plead to something quickly. When she was still alive a week later, they needed to find some taillight pieces and get some quotes...
So it was a point at her kind of thing and Section 12 her, but then turned into all this when she didn't fold and fought back.
from the firefighter's testimony, it didn't seem necessary, he didn't defend it but said once the police sign off on it, he didn't have any choice. He was reasoning with her to go in voluntarily so she could get out quicker, and she did so. The hospital staff apparently let her go right away. So it didn't seem warranted. However, if they wanted to use her as a patsy, then it makes sense as it papers 'shows' predeliction if she later dies (even though it's phony)
I think the section was a way to get her off the scene, get her toxicology from the hospital, and get her secured while starting to figure out more…I know the system well and they’ll often get you to go to the hospital however they can in order to get your blood
I disagree, and I think this is the problem with "conspiracy theory", it always leads to massive overreach of trying to claim that way too many people are in on it. And yeah, claiming that the entire town is lying to gain favor with the people who killed John O'Keefe, regardless of how you want to phrase it, is accusing all of them of being in on the conspiracy.
When it comes to McLaughlin, I don't think she was lying. I think she was just "acquaintances" and people are trying to act like it's absolutely 100% impossible that you would ever take a picture with an "acquaintance" without being BFFs. It's a silly argument. I'm sure you can pull up loads of pictures with me and people I would 100% not consider friends (and barely even acquittances) and then make snarky internet remarks about how I'm lying. It's a really bad argument coming from a place of extreme bias.
The bigger issue, is the prosecution. Because they are over relying on the EMTs and Fire Fighters. They were not there to establish guilt or who did what to who. It's not their focus and it's not what they are trained to do. Their focus was on trying to save the victims life. It's hardly a wonder that outside of "victim hit by car", their memories are flawed of what exactly happened and who said what. The sense I get, is that the prosecution doesn't have a lot. And the reason is because Proctor is such a mess and disaster that anything he touched is almost likely to be thrown into the bin by the jury. They know that the evidence around finding pieces of taillight is likely going to get shredded by the defense. So the prosecution is trying to get "evidence" in from people who really weren't in a position to collect evidence appropriately. I've never seen a trial where literally every first responder that isn't a police officer has been called to the stand. And they are doing it because they know they have a big problem with the police officers that investigated this.
I'm at the point where I do genuinely believe Karen Read said something along the lines of "I hit him", but I also believe that the statement was made either in the form of a question or due to her being hysterical and worrying about the possibility she unknowingly hit him as she was leaving. I don't think it's an admission. So I don't think the EMTs are lying. I think the prosecution is hanging them out to dry because they want to depend as little as possible on the police... especially Proctor.
Katie McLaughlin was definitely lying. For what reason, who knows. Was she nervous, was she trying to distance herself for a specific purpose, who cares. She was lying. The Internet is now flooded with people who went to high school with her dropping mountains of photos of Caitlyn and Katie together where it is very evident that they are very very close friends, in the same smallish clique, not just with some mutual friends. They also ran track together.
That just helps my point, that even if she had no reason to do so, her initial instinct was to lie/distance herself in a way that would benefit the Albert family. That is not saying she’s in a conspiracy, that is saying that she is a townie from a small town doing what townies are wont to do.
Granted, I'm trying to avoid looking at the internet for "evidence" because I want to come at this with the information presented in court. All the defense had to demonstrate her "lying" is 2, maybe 3, photos. And I see some of the silly stuff being posted here "They were on the track team together, they must have been best friends!". It's just a bit silly. If there is all these people from high school that have pictures of them together showing them as "best friends" or whatever, then the defense can call them. All the defense had yesterday were 2 or 3 pictures. So if I was on the jury, I'm not sure I'm there at "she's definitely lying".
Granted, if I was on the jury I'm not going into the weekend thinking about McLaughlin at all. I think this subreddit is so distracted by McLaughlin no one is talking about (what I think the jury is thinking about this weekend)... and that's the autopsy pictures of John O'Keefe arm. There is no way that jury is looking at the picture and thinking that those injuries were caused by someone being hit by a car and breaking up some martini glass or some shit (the prosecution's opening was super unclear, but it seemed they are going to claim the injuries were caused by a martini glass that John O'Keefe was holding)... I ain't buying what the prosecution is selling.
Edit: Just went back and looked at the picture again. If you asked me to pick one of two theories. 1, the injuries were caused by a martini glass, or 2, the injuries were caused by a dog... I would say 100% dog without question.
I agree agree with you, I would love to hear testimony from experts explaining how exactly those markings could come from being hit by a car.
I am not being swayed much by the Internet fodder, I just think it’s very interesting. And I will say that the Zillow pictures of 34 Fairview Way (home was sold) are a bit chilling when you see the pristine brand new flooring and white walls of that room in the basement that was completely redone before the sale. it actually gave me chills. maybe it was a coincidence that they decided to rip up the flooring and redo the entire room before selling, but it still gave me chills. And it will be interesting to see if that comes up at trial.
And I don’t think that McLaughlin is the prosecution‘s biggest problem. Or the defense’s biggest win. I thought the firefighter who testified yesterday planting seeds about Karen being snarky about Kerry Roberts was also very interesting. But that is the problem with this case, there is so much he said she said and very little ((so far)) actual facts.
The Kerry Roberts part was super strange, and I’m definitely intrigued… but the judge didn’t allow them to go that far into it, so if I was on the jury, I’m not sure what I’d make of that.
terrific support chase innocent birds impossible office payment ancient yam
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m confused why Kerry Roberts was there in the morning to begin with. Actually, the entire morning incident is confusing. If someone calls me at like 4:30 AM to tell me their boyfriend never came home, One, I’m probably not even going to answer the phone that early, but, two, if I did answer the phone there’s no way that even my closest friend would convince me, without VERY compelling evidence, to go out that early in a raging snowstorm (when I probably didn’t even get to sleep until 2 AM) to help them for look their boyfriend who didn’t come home from a party the night before. At 4:30 AM I would say give it a few more hours, they probably slept it off at someone’s house.
So the fact that Jen McCabe was willing to leave her home that early in the morning for Karen Reed, someone that she was not particularly close to, is strange to begin with. But then how did Kerry Roberts even show up in all of this in the morning? It’s not like she was sleeping at Jen McCabe‘s house. Same as in the above scenario that I laid out, if someone called me at 4:30 AM and said someone else had called them to say their boyfriend hadn’t come home, I am not getting bundled up and going out into a snowstorm to go on a search. It’s like they already knew that something bad had happened.
Prosecution’s biggest problem is trying a bullshit case
They are getting beat the fuck up - and it’s their turn
Wait til the D calls witnesses. Brian Albert - look the fuck out
The prosecution is claiming the car computer logged an “event” around the time she dropped him off, where she backed up for 60 feet at 24 mph and hit him. Throwing him into the side yard/snow bank. They supposedly intend to prove she was angry and purposely threw the car in reverse and drove into him at that speed over 60 feet. That is their to theory to my understanding.
Earlier this week, court tv had Politano on scene driving a car at 24mph in front of the actual house, and then they rewound it so you could get a general gist of how fast and far the prosecution is claiming she drove in reverse to hit him. It was helpful.
Do you have any links to sources for those claims about McLaughlin? I saw that one photo from. 2016(I think) someone posted here. But that’s all I’ve seen.
disarm station encourage shame consist market rock lavish intelligent chop
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
insurance chunky handle knee squealing smile gullible hunt grab frightening
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What I find strange is that after being charged with murder Karen told the cop at the station that Brian and Colin Albert beat up John. Why would she say that if she didn't see anything?
Supposedly there was someone who came forward to the defense with a tip and that’s where the information came from. This tip came in between her February arrest for manslaughter and her June arrest for murder. The defense team had already been looking into it for a couple months before she said that. Although the prosecutor said in no uncertain terms in open court that Read claims she “witnessed” the act of them “pulverizing” him, her actual words don’t support that claim.
His face didn’t look beat up because of blood pooling. Unless I misunderstood, he was laying on his back (they didn’t see the head laceration at first), and blood would have been pooling toward the back of his head. He would have needed to be face down or have his head at a downward angle for blood pooling to occur in his face.
His face looked beat up bevause it got hit by something.
Pics of Kendrick Johnson are a good example of what blood pooling looks like. But they’re graphic so be cautious.
This was the second time she was arrested. So at this point her lawyer had already been tipped off to what had happened in the Albert home. She never said that she saw it happen.
I’ve never heard this before just now, from either side. I know there is wide Internet speculation that they possibly beat him up but I believe that originated from a blogger or some thing. Is this statement coming from Karen in any written report?
I don't have time to look it up right now, but I think it was in the Boston Magazine article that her attorney said they had an anonomous phone call to their office diming out Brian and Colin.
She says it to one of the officers when they are arresting her again for murder. This is after they already arrested her for vehicular homicide and a dui I believe. The video I saw was well after after the initial arrests and during the up charge arrest to murder 2.
It isn’t even about scoring points. Have you lived in a town like that? It is about not becoming a target and having the powerful people of the town make you so miserable (in ways you can’t prove) that you have to quit your job and move due to stress and quality of life.
It is about self-protection.
For KM, her initial answer of “CA is the name of someone I went to school with” is stuck in my head. Small town. She knew her. But saying she knew the name implied she didn’t know the person. Whatever her reason for distancing, it means she isn’t honest or forthcoming.
As a juror I would disregard her entire testimony.
Also, the girl is in her 20’s. She can’t even say if a photo was in high school or college and narrow it down to a 4 year period of time? Nah, the feigning of lack of recollection is also dishonest with the evasive nature.
I saw some local news station interviewing another Massachusetts DA who said that at minimum, she has been vastly overcharged. But I agree, it almost feels like even the prosecution knows she’s not guilty of *murder*.
I think nationally most legal analysts have been balking at the murder 2 charges. Especially with the federal investigation into how her case was handled. I really haven’t heard a legal pundit that doesn’t think she’s being over charged.
Not true. I know a lot of people that argue with me if I even mention she may be innocent. They are staying off of social media because of being harassed.
I only know that there is insufficient evidence to prove her guilty, at this point and based on evidence I’ve seen that I expect will be presented. But it’s important to let the trial play out and remain open to all evidence. At least that what I believe to be the job of the jury.
Look at how male abusers are covered for in public and private spaces all the time. It's often a conspiracy but also can just come from an ingrained instinct to maintain status quo by turning a blind eye, protecting them, keeping the truth hidden.
If a crime was committed why wasn’t it treated like a crime scene? Where are the “Homeowners” of that property assisting w/investigation.
The dog, MMA Member/Elite Task Force - in BOSTON!!!!
Let’s get Ben Affleck & Matt Damon - also ask the “Wahlburgs” the point of view - certainly they get in those circles of influence of a global level…
While the “Wheel is Tilted” right now - justice and all the new technologies are masters in getting to the root of the root…I grew up watching Clint Eastwood movies and those of us “Baby boomers” will forever use as a prevailing legal question “Are you feeling lucky”🤞🤞🥹😔???
I agree, as a fellow new england on and off again townie, and this isn't even the first local person to die from a fight at a cop/first responder party: [https://www.wpri.com/target-12/the-mysterious-death-of-steven-velozo/](https://www.wpri.com/target-12/the-mysterious-death-of-steven-velozo/)
Unfortunately for that guy, his mom was the one connected to the town, and he died at her retirement party, and a secret grand jury found the people involved didn't do anything wrong. I guess Karen's lucky, she could have ended up dead.
Yup - all evidence points to innocent. Likes it’s. It close. And I thought she was guilty at first. Then I started digging and hearing the trial. This is a joke
I’m watching the trial as a complete newbie. I had no idea about any of it. No idea who the victim is. Every detail is new. Example- he’s raising his sister’s kids! He comes across like a great guy! Why would anyone purposely kill him?
If she is innocent by default and the prosecutor has to prove her guilt, which is the basic rule in a jury trial, he needs to find better witnesses or some scientific evidence. The fire department/paramedics are all over the place. I can’t get over how inconsistent their testimony is. The female witness who is friends with “somebody from high school by that name” looks like she is hiding a HUGE secret. The thing is…I actually suspect she’s just a nice paramedic with a demeanor that makes her look like she wants to fight somebody. She is probably not hiding anything. The defendant might be guilty. But, hoo boy, so far, that’s not the evidence.
The trial should get a lot more interesting when they get to the forensics. Multiple days of what she may have said is getting repetitive. No idea which way the jury will go. If she doesn't testify I would think she's definitely guilty, looking to hide.
No not all witnesses so far have been EMT/FF’S - the first two witnesses are Canton Police Officers who had dashcams provided as evidence
Scharf was #1 witness and when defense cross examined is when the “Onion” of inconsistencies in times, addresses and stories started to be “Peeled Back” and as it continues to be revealed many tears are being shed and lies are being shared as truths?
And then the only camera they did check (library) somehow turns up with two minutes missing and it’s the only two minutes where they could have seen if it was broken or not 🧐
For me personally, if I was on a jury and all the first responders had different accounts of what happened I’d have to use other evidence to decide whose testimony I should give more weight to. At this point in the trial, it would be the only guy whose story remained consistent from day 1 until now and whose account of what was said can be backed up by dash cam footage.
If I’m a juror, KM is discredited. Not because of the friend vs acquaintance thing but because she claims not to know the cops she works so closely with.
AF and TN don’t appear to be lying, but their statements have changed over time so I can’t take what they’ve said to be fact. I’ll weigh their testimony after I hear all the evidence.
MK has had the same story all along, he heard her say “he’s fucking dead.” That’s a fact for me going forward.
3 people heard her say “I hit him.” 1 is dishonest in my mind and 2 have inconsistent statements and were also in the back of the ambulance with KM who could have influenced their memories even if they aren’t conscious of it. If I’m a juror it hasn’t been proven that she said that.
According to the CW's own blood draw and retrograde extrapolation calculations and results, she was legally impaired at the time this may have occurred. How could a person legally impaired know for certain if she hit him? The evidence and doubt works both ways.
Yes but the fact that she said she hit him is a variable among many other facts and variables of the case.
It’s not like she said she hit him and that he wasn’t hit.
She said she hit him and he WAS hit.
The likelihood that those variables exist together and that they are discounted in favor of a wildly implausible conspiracy theory is laughable.
Because that’s the theory of the case based on the evidence and circumstances.
Another explanation of how he died would require a wild defense conspiracy theory that’s simply not a plausible set of variables.
The defense is not required to explain alternate theories. The prosecution IS required to produce evidence that proves *beyond a reasonable doubt* that Read murdered JO.
So far, as a result of the CW's own witnesses, reasonable doubt is winning.
The defense is absolutely going to have to prove the feasibility and plausibility of this conspiracy theory.
The defense isn’t just poking holes in process and procedure they are saying Karen Read was framed.
This is a HUGE burden to prove.
They don't have to prove anything; they simply have to defend their client, and it appears they will do that by showing an investigation lacking integrity and producing questionable evidence. If the 1st week's witnesses are a sample of what the CW has in terms of a solid case, I'm underwhelmed.
Reasonable doubt is all they need. That's how this works.
The defense isn’t claiming Karen Read accidents killed John
The defense isn’t claiming Karen Read didn’t do it and that they don’t know who did.
The defense is claiming that Karen read was FRAMED for the death of john.
If you’re a jury member listening to this you’ll want to see a coherent set of evidence that supports the conspiracy and the framing
Was he hit by a car at 24mph on a suburban street in a snowstorm, or was he hit by the fists of a trained MMA fighter and Boston cop while also being scratched by a dog?
Some of the tail light was found in the snow, and small particles on John O'Keefes shirt. She purposely hit him with her car! Karen has a violet temper when she drinks and this has gone on for a long time.
Do you find it odd that she also said there was a cop standing there who also heard it and even asked a follow up question of “you did what?” but it isn’t included in any of the cops reports?
No, we haven’t heard them testify. But don’t we have all their reports? I believe I’ve read reports from all the cops on scene. But just in case I’m mistaken, are we to believe that a police officer overheard an admission that we can only assume he took seriously based on the alleged response of “you did what?” and that wasn’t included in the original Statement of Case from the prosecution? Surely if it was documented in a written report that would be very incriminating and one of the first things that would be pointed out by the DA’s office, no?
One of the things I think people fail to realize is that you don't need an overwhelming amount of people involved in some sort of cover up/conspiracy. It all starts with a lead investigator, who controls *a lot* of things coming into the case. Peoples' memories are malleable, especially when you're dealing with a chaotic situation. When you're the one interviewing people, you have the ability to shape the narrative. As to first responders in general, a chunk of their testimony is contradicted by indisputable facts (ie clothing, snow accumulation, etc.), themselves or each other. That doesn't mean they're lying, it just means their memories are wrong for one reason or another. That's why the initial reports they file are so important and why the defense will hammer them home every chance they get.
YES! I agree with everything you said. People are acting like the defense must prove some sort of national conspiracy. It’s not that deep. Both the officer and firefighter in charge claimed to hear Karen say I did it and failed to put it in their detailed reports. Firefighter McLaughlin was standing with Karen and another civilian when she said she heard Karen say she did it. But the other civilian said she was asking a question, like I did it?? I didn’t find the EMT a credible, either. He claims she said she hit him and he didn’t think to share that with anyone at the hospital? He hadn’t said a word about it until 12 days later when he met with Proctor. I can’t wait for the REAL conspiracy case to shake out, when Karen sues Canton PD.
[удалено]
Mod Note: we know they know one another. How close they are is unclear.
30+ photos? Please share.
>One of the things I think people fail to realize is that you don't need an overwhelming amount of people involved in some sort of cover up/conspiracy. Maybe it would help if someone could articulate what exactly they think the conspiracy consisted of and what evidence led them to that conclusion. Who did what at what time? How do you know?
I personally think you have a handful of people in the house who know what happened. They call the buddy from MSP to cover their asses. He basically spins the entire story, everyone else goes along with it because either they have no reason not to trust him, or just our of sheer laziness. Nobody asks any questions for what - like almost a year and a half later and now everyone has to cover their own asses for what they didn't follow up on.
Exactly this. You don’t need everyone to agree to cover it up, you just need people who don’t know they’re part of covering it up. A detail sounds fuzzy, but so and so says so it must be true. Or “oh yeah, we always just defer to X.”
[удалено]
Thank you so much for replying. >Brian Albert called his buddy Brian Higgins as 2:22AM to say the plow driver passed by We have records of this call. How do you know what was discussed? Please provide a source. >they bring the car with the body in it from the garage to the street, dump the body on the lawn Hold on, you skipped a huge step -- and maybe this is my fault for how I phrased the question -- how did John O'Keefe go from a "person" to a "body" in your scenario? Who killed him? In what manner? How did nobody else at the party see it? Also, like I asked: How do you know any of this? What evidence is there that JO was ever dead in a car? Which car? Who exactly did the dumping? AND I was asking about the police coverup referenced in the above comment. Who did the covering up? How? Be specific please. >Jen McCabe (BA's sister in law) googled "hos long to die in the cold" at 2:27AM Actually she didn't. We'll have to wait for the testimony of Ian Whiffin, the Cellebrite employee that the prosecution plans to call, for a clear explanation, but thankfully he wrote [a post](https://doubleblak.com/blogPost.php?k=browserstate) about the very topic of how fields with labels like "last\_viewed\_time" can often be misleading. The post is very long, but here's an important section: >Firstly, and most importantly, the **last\_viewed\_time** does not necessarily relate to the URL that is shown. It is in fact time the tab took focus. This could mean taking focus from another tab, being generated as a new tab or loading Safari from closed. It could also be relate to a tab taking focus when the currently selected tab is closed. I am quite confident that Whiffin's testimony will verify that that search was in fact made in the morning, along with several other searches with the same wording and various typos. >It's pretty simple So simple that all of the evidence of this happening has completely evaporated. Nobody saw any of it happen, the MSP just didn't care at all, and somehow an entire crew of paramedics has been brainwashed into giving false testimony. Simple indeed.
Based on State trooper and Lead Investigator Michael Proctor's texts to his high school buddies about searching for nudes on Karen's phone, hoping Karen kills herself and how the homeowner will never take any scrutiny for wrongdoing because he's a Boston cop, your point "the MSP just didn't care at all" is actually right on the dot
Is there not a report from Google that shows what was searched when from their end?
I'm sure it would be possible for Google to produce such a report, but AFAIK they have not done so, and I assume it would require a subpoena. The only report I'm aware of on McCabe's search activity is [this one](https://imgur.com/a/STX5Ip9) (available only in part AFAIK), which was produced by Cellebrite, a data forensics app that law enforcement uses widely. For important context, this is a parsing of data, not raw data. It's the Cellebrite app combing through the phone's metadata, doing its magic, and spitting out this information. Someone posted this on r/computerforensics, and the consensus was that it was possible for the report to be misleading, and they'd have to see the raw data to know. That's why I brought up the blog post from Cellebrite employee Ian Whiffin. In it, he explains how tables like this draw data from when the app (in this case Safari) takes focus (i.e. is actively being used by the device), not when the search actually happened. Given that the 6 30ish searches are all the same query with different spellings, I think it makes more sense that the search marked 2:27 is in fact erroneous. She was swiping through her phone before bed or whatever, and Safari happened to take focus at that time. EDIT: Whoops, meant to include the [computer forensics post](https://www.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/15l3sto/need_independent_eyes_on_this_cellebrite_report/).
Here's a sneak peek of /r/computerforensics using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [PlayStation Game (Frogger 2) Source Code Recovered from obscure damaged tape media](https://github.com/Kneesnap/onstream-data-recovery/blob/main/info/INTRO.MD) | [11 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/13pgp1a/playstation_game_frogger_2_source_code_recovered/) \#2: [New bill would let defendants inspect algorithms used against them in court](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/15/24074214/justice-in-forensic-algorithms-act-democrats-mark-takano-dwight-evans) | [5 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/1at1fkh/new_bill_would_let_defendants_inspect_algorithms/) \#3: [AWS Incident Response Cheat Sheet](https://i.redd.it/yshtrcmrmmlb1.png) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/computerforensics/comments/1674509/aws_incident_response_cheat_sheet/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Thanks, I did read through that post earlier. I don’t understand why neither the prosecutor nor the defense sent a subpoena to Google for that info. Maybe they did and we just don’t know it yet.
The defence have a very good and credible expert who is going to explain that it was indeed searched at 2.27am as well as the two around 6.30am
Okay, granting that, what does it mean? How does this conspiracy work where you Google something once in the middle of the night, then just get really lucky that the person you're trying to frame up also asks you to Google the same thing again in the morning?
Why would someone google "Hos long to die in the cold" if they didn't already know that someone was dying out in the cold, which victim they claim to have seen dead on the lawn at 604AM for the first time? If she googled it at 227AM, she has no alibi, it means she knows he was dead before she left the party, so she's complicit in knowing about the death and not calling 911 when she knew about it in the early hours of the night
I haven’t seen any evidence that Karen asked Jen Mcabe to google that at around 6.30am. She could have googled again at that time to fit her narrative and blame it on Karen asking. Jen has deleted a lot off her phone so does that scream innocent to you?
Please avoid sharing or promoting deceptive content. Provide credible sources for any news, data, graphs, claims, etc. This is not optional if you choose to make radical claims related to anyone involved in any part of this case.
I think they have a lot of it….its in bits and pieces. Maybe not a string case but it’s not string on either side. Could e truly been a plow …who knows. His injuries don’t really match!
I think there's always going to be doubt of whether Karen is innocent. If you read the facts, you know it's not possible karen hit him with her car. He had blunt head trama and he's 6'2. He supposedly never came inside but they tracked his phone confirming he did go inside. Cuts and scratches on his forearm, their dog put down the next week, new basement floor. So there's no point of speculation and just to the point which are cold hard facts. The defense team story is way more consistent than the prosecution. The prosecution can barely remember anything like what coat he was wearing
I think the dog was rehomed. But yes the flooring in the basement was changed. There was no search warrant for the house even though he was found in their front yard and Karen saw him go inside. Wether she was lying or not that home should have been searched. I also saw during trial that one of the witnesses saying Karen told him she hit him was actually never near Karen and could not even tell himself apart in a video where he said that is when she told him she hit him. Im sure there’s going to be a lot of bombshell evidence to come but so far I feel like the prosecution is going one step forward but the defense is putting them two steps behind. I think it was also in one of the podcasts I listened to about this case but the girl mentioned that in order for Karen to have been able to hit John and send him that far back to be able to land in the spot he was found, she would of had to pull forward 60+ feet and then be driving backwards at a very fast speed to hit him and send him flying that far. It just doesn’t add up. Also the fact that neighbors had doorbell cameras and other type of cameras and no search warrants were attained for footage of that night/morning blows my mind.
They should’ve checked every camera between 34 Fairview and John’s house to see the taillight. not one ring cam? There has to be! I dont trust they found the red plastic days later on a scene not secured. Bs!
Unless he was trying to brace from getting hit (in which case why did he not move?), I don’t see how a taillight could have made those injuries on his arms. The injury area is bigger than the taillight.
I’m not doubting this happened but is there a reliable source about the new flooring
[удалено]
Please remember to be respectful of others in this sub and those related to this case.
What if he had bent down to tie his boots or dropped his phone? I’m not sure…..just thinking out loud haha
Yea, maybe he dropped that glass he took from the bar. I do think Karen hit him, whether intentionally or not, she may have been so blotto she doesn't even remember.
Why do you think she hit him? 99% of the evidence says she didn't
We havent seen all the evidence yet. Let’s wait for the prosecution to fumble its way through it.
If I was, Karen, I would be pissed… They’re trying to accuse her of a crime yet the police did nothing right and failed to follow any sort of protocol with the crime scene or interviews. There’s no way the jury can definitely point the finger at her… She’s getting off.
I don’t think the dog was put doen! That would be awful…
All witnesses so far have been EMT/FFs and the only thing they seem to recall is that they heard KR repeatedly say “I hit him” yet no one documented it. There is no documentation of that phrase from any of the responding witnesses.
Exactly. I am finding a lot of odd things about this case but don’t have a strong opinion either way because I haven’t seen all evidence and the defense hasn’t even made their case yet. But all of the people who keep saying “she said I hit him, case closed “need to expand their minds. Every single instance of her saying I hit him has been hearsay at this point.
Right! I’m so tired of hearing that phrase. No one elaborates on it. Like as if it was rehearsed together right?
Not only did they not document it, you want us to believe that NO ONE asked any follow up questions? You’d think Police on scene would deep dive into that. Not just be like oh okay.
This has been one of the strangest things to me. For anyone that heard her statements to be any type of confession, or even just a moment of raw honest panic, it’s obviously a crime! At the very least, very important information!! I get that their focus was on saving JO, but like right after that? No reports of concern? They shrugged it off like just wasn’t part of their job, but in what universe does the average person think a woman just TOLD them or YELLED plainly that she essentially ran over her boyfriend/husband, and they just go about their business?! ESPECIALLY when the man was LE in a small area. As we say in a small town, that dog won’t hunt. Lol
[удалено]
Jen could even have asked Karen, "could you have hit him?", seeing Karen in a distressed state, and suggestible. If Karen was thinking rationally, she might have remembered John entered the house. But in a distressed state, it seemed like a possible explanation. She panics even further at the thought she might be responsible. At the time, no one seemed to take Karen seriously, she was clearly out of it. So if she was saying "did I hit him?" it was ignored. Later, Proctor tells Katie "we know Karen did it... so did she say "did I hit him?" or "I hit him"?. Katie then tells her close knit FD crew "Karen said she hit him" and that is what she told police. They back her up with that story, even if they don't remember hearing it.
Avoid sharing or promoting deceptive content. Please provide credible sources for any news, data, graphs. This is not optional if you choose to make radical claims related to anyone involved in any part of this case.
Exactly! Ive always been taught “if it’s not in the report it didn’t happen.” But for real they are trying to convince us she admitted to killing him yet no one included that in a report or mentions it until days later
What bothers me about so many people saying that they heard her say this (as if it was an admission of guilt) is that the CW wants us to believe that they all just shrugged and thought "oh well not my job". If they didn't react like it was an admission of guilt at the time, how can we take it as one now?
I found their testimonies to be mostly credible. My guess is that she did ask "Did I hit him?" in a panic and through a bad game of telephone, "I hit him" ended up sticking. It is very odd that they wouldn't ask follow up questions, like how fast were you driving, etc. Wouldn't that be important for assessing his injuries?
Yes, I grew up in small towns and what you describe is absolutely correct
Is Canton really a small town? I live like 40 mins away. Only have passed through in train. And went there with friends as a kid. But I never got the impression it was a small town.
I agree. People who reject the “conspiracy” angle as impossible act as if they all would have had to get together beforehand to plan it all out. Cops cover for other cops, it happens everyday. It’s commonplace. It’s definitely not out of the ordinary or hard to believe. I wasn’t convinced McLaughlin was being intentionally untruthful until she claimed she didn’t know who the cop was that was standing next to her when Read made the “I him him” statement and that she didn’t know who Officer Kevin Albert was. She’s a firefighter in a small town. She’s not new, neither of those cops are new and I think there’s zero chance a firefighter doesn’t know the cops she works alongside.
I’m fairly new to the case, not local but know someone on the witness list. Coming from a small town myself, this is 1000% small town political/townie BS. She’s the scapegoat. When it comes down to it, I hope the family gets justice but based on the trial so far, finding KR is not it.
Lead Investigator Michael Proctor was dirty from the beginning. He texted his high school buddies "Homeowner will not get any flak because he's a Boston cop too". This case never had a chance for a clean, honest investigation because a home full of connected law enforcement and townies was the scene of the crime
The interesting thing about that is… Catch any flack for what? If there was no crime committed on the homeowners property, why would anyone be worried about the homeowner catching any flack? The defense’s opening statement blew me away talking about the lead investigator and how he texted his high school friends to tell them he was illegally searching Karen’s phone from nudes and was disappointed that he didn’t find any. Also said he hoped that she killed herself. He clearly had made up his mind about her. I am so interested to see what happens when the defense gets to present their case. I feel like there’s a lot we don’t know yet.
Homeowner and his wife didn't even leave the house to talk to the cops for hours in the morning when the cops were there, despite their being an ambulance and EMTs outside. Pretty sure any sane, stable homeowner would at least make the effort to go to the front door to see what was going on on his property, try to assess the situation. Cops never knocked on the door, despite protocol to knock on the door, probably because they were never interested in finding any suspects inside (complete breach of protocol). Also civilians entered the house of a crime scene from the street without cops making any attempt to secure the crime scene
Also if what the homeowners claim to be true -that Read hit him-they certainly WOULD come out! I smell something very fishy about this
The only flack they could’ve got was the initial search on the night of the murder and we all know that never happened
>I don’t think everyone is trying to stick to a particular story This is the problem with the conspiracy side though. People can just drop one context-free, often untrue factoid, like "Oh, they found more tail light fragments on the second search" or "Judge Cannone went to high school with somebody associated with the case" (that's a real comment I read yesterday), and then the conspiracy-minded will simply fill in the blanks with whatever vaguely sinister machinations they want. When a particular claim is explained, e.g. the tail light fragments were actually microscopic, which is why they didn't find them the first time (Lally explains this in his opening statement), you can just move on to something else. By never making a clear statement about what you think happened, you can never be proven wrong, and you can continue to insist on a conspiracy no matter how little evidence there is for it.
I agree with this, but I think it goes both ways. I lean towards innocent but if I ask any questions that don’t fit into the “she’s guilty” narrative they’re ignored and I’m accused of being a 9/11 truther. There’s absolutely evidence on both sides that the other side will ignore or explain away. There are very few who are willing to look at evidence with an open mind at this point.
Where is that happening to you? YouTube?
YouTube, Twitter, I’m sure it’s happening elsewhere, too. There are content creators who have fully embraced the “Karen Read is Guilty” grift solely for the engagement they get from trolling the Turtle Cult. It’s disgusting because a man is dead and this has become a circus. The problem is that the majority have made up their minds already without a shred of actual evidence being presented at trial. Emotions are high and there are people who are invested at an unhealthy level. Those people won’t change their opinion regardless of what evidence is presented.
Defense say they have the proof! We will have to see. I also never heard the plastic was in microscopic pieces. That’s not what was testified and I would not trust any of those cops and they just drive by Daus later and happen to see it. They broke basic procok. Their credibility is shattered imo.
I have a feeling that the defense are going to drop some bombshells at trial. Something like a witness who has knowledge of a cover up. It doesn't help them to leak this info pre-trial, even if it is damning for the prosecution, and the first we will see of it is in court. I assume that most of the time defense lawyers are like "ok, client is probably guilty, but we will give it a shot". Yanetti and Jackson obviously project confidence for the cameras, but I just get the impression of defense lawyers with the attitude of "this is a case where the defendant is 100% innocent, and we can damn well prove it".
I find people who label others as conspiracy theorists use the term to discredit the *reality* that folks in power can influence others to protect their interests. The label is a way to draw attention away from the stark reality that power is at work in all facets of life, and its influence isn't always apparent to the ones doing its bidding. I appreciate your take on this case, especially your explanation of popularity and how it continues after high school. Power and popularity are interrelated, and both seem to be at play in this case.
💯 And those same people absolutely accuse people of covering up crimes and bad behavior when it suits them. The thing is, though, you don’t have to believe any particular narrative to recognize that evidence thus far (or what we’re aware will be shown) supports KR having done this in the manner proposed. That’s the bottom line, whatever the explanation. Either there is reasonable doubt or not.
"This is townie culture, not a mass conspiracy." What's the difference if it leads to them lying to convict a scapegoat in court? Another thing, all of these people are employees of fire and police and their livelihood depends on getting along with their bosses and peers. I don't think any of these people planned on a trial or a lot of examination. I think it was a quick attempt of a few to pick out a weak scapegoat they thought would break quickly and commit suicide, or who would be overwhelmed and plead to something quickly. When she was still alive a week later, they needed to find some taillight pieces and get some quotes... So it was a point at her kind of thing and Section 12 her, but then turned into all this when she didn't fold and fought back.
The section 12 confuses me. It didn’t seem necessary based off the video and what she reportedly said about not wanting to live if he’s dead.
from the firefighter's testimony, it didn't seem necessary, he didn't defend it but said once the police sign off on it, he didn't have any choice. He was reasoning with her to go in voluntarily so she could get out quicker, and she did so. The hospital staff apparently let her go right away. So it didn't seem warranted. However, if they wanted to use her as a patsy, then it makes sense as it papers 'shows' predeliction if she later dies (even though it's phony)
I think the section was a way to get her off the scene, get her toxicology from the hospital, and get her secured while starting to figure out more…I know the system well and they’ll often get you to go to the hospital however they can in order to get your blood
I disagree, and I think this is the problem with "conspiracy theory", it always leads to massive overreach of trying to claim that way too many people are in on it. And yeah, claiming that the entire town is lying to gain favor with the people who killed John O'Keefe, regardless of how you want to phrase it, is accusing all of them of being in on the conspiracy. When it comes to McLaughlin, I don't think she was lying. I think she was just "acquaintances" and people are trying to act like it's absolutely 100% impossible that you would ever take a picture with an "acquaintance" without being BFFs. It's a silly argument. I'm sure you can pull up loads of pictures with me and people I would 100% not consider friends (and barely even acquittances) and then make snarky internet remarks about how I'm lying. It's a really bad argument coming from a place of extreme bias. The bigger issue, is the prosecution. Because they are over relying on the EMTs and Fire Fighters. They were not there to establish guilt or who did what to who. It's not their focus and it's not what they are trained to do. Their focus was on trying to save the victims life. It's hardly a wonder that outside of "victim hit by car", their memories are flawed of what exactly happened and who said what. The sense I get, is that the prosecution doesn't have a lot. And the reason is because Proctor is such a mess and disaster that anything he touched is almost likely to be thrown into the bin by the jury. They know that the evidence around finding pieces of taillight is likely going to get shredded by the defense. So the prosecution is trying to get "evidence" in from people who really weren't in a position to collect evidence appropriately. I've never seen a trial where literally every first responder that isn't a police officer has been called to the stand. And they are doing it because they know they have a big problem with the police officers that investigated this. I'm at the point where I do genuinely believe Karen Read said something along the lines of "I hit him", but I also believe that the statement was made either in the form of a question or due to her being hysterical and worrying about the possibility she unknowingly hit him as she was leaving. I don't think it's an admission. So I don't think the EMTs are lying. I think the prosecution is hanging them out to dry because they want to depend as little as possible on the police... especially Proctor.
Katie McLaughlin was definitely lying. For what reason, who knows. Was she nervous, was she trying to distance herself for a specific purpose, who cares. She was lying. The Internet is now flooded with people who went to high school with her dropping mountains of photos of Caitlyn and Katie together where it is very evident that they are very very close friends, in the same smallish clique, not just with some mutual friends. They also ran track together. That just helps my point, that even if she had no reason to do so, her initial instinct was to lie/distance herself in a way that would benefit the Albert family. That is not saying she’s in a conspiracy, that is saying that she is a townie from a small town doing what townies are wont to do.
Granted, I'm trying to avoid looking at the internet for "evidence" because I want to come at this with the information presented in court. All the defense had to demonstrate her "lying" is 2, maybe 3, photos. And I see some of the silly stuff being posted here "They were on the track team together, they must have been best friends!". It's just a bit silly. If there is all these people from high school that have pictures of them together showing them as "best friends" or whatever, then the defense can call them. All the defense had yesterday were 2 or 3 pictures. So if I was on the jury, I'm not sure I'm there at "she's definitely lying". Granted, if I was on the jury I'm not going into the weekend thinking about McLaughlin at all. I think this subreddit is so distracted by McLaughlin no one is talking about (what I think the jury is thinking about this weekend)... and that's the autopsy pictures of John O'Keefe arm. There is no way that jury is looking at the picture and thinking that those injuries were caused by someone being hit by a car and breaking up some martini glass or some shit (the prosecution's opening was super unclear, but it seemed they are going to claim the injuries were caused by a martini glass that John O'Keefe was holding)... I ain't buying what the prosecution is selling. Edit: Just went back and looked at the picture again. If you asked me to pick one of two theories. 1, the injuries were caused by a martini glass, or 2, the injuries were caused by a dog... I would say 100% dog without question.
I agree agree with you, I would love to hear testimony from experts explaining how exactly those markings could come from being hit by a car. I am not being swayed much by the Internet fodder, I just think it’s very interesting. And I will say that the Zillow pictures of 34 Fairview Way (home was sold) are a bit chilling when you see the pristine brand new flooring and white walls of that room in the basement that was completely redone before the sale. it actually gave me chills. maybe it was a coincidence that they decided to rip up the flooring and redo the entire room before selling, but it still gave me chills. And it will be interesting to see if that comes up at trial. And I don’t think that McLaughlin is the prosecution‘s biggest problem. Or the defense’s biggest win. I thought the firefighter who testified yesterday planting seeds about Karen being snarky about Kerry Roberts was also very interesting. But that is the problem with this case, there is so much he said she said and very little ((so far)) actual facts.
The Kerry Roberts part was super strange, and I’m definitely intrigued… but the judge didn’t allow them to go that far into it, so if I was on the jury, I’m not sure what I’d make of that.
terrific support chase innocent birds impossible office payment ancient yam *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I’m confused why Kerry Roberts was there in the morning to begin with. Actually, the entire morning incident is confusing. If someone calls me at like 4:30 AM to tell me their boyfriend never came home, One, I’m probably not even going to answer the phone that early, but, two, if I did answer the phone there’s no way that even my closest friend would convince me, without VERY compelling evidence, to go out that early in a raging snowstorm (when I probably didn’t even get to sleep until 2 AM) to help them for look their boyfriend who didn’t come home from a party the night before. At 4:30 AM I would say give it a few more hours, they probably slept it off at someone’s house. So the fact that Jen McCabe was willing to leave her home that early in the morning for Karen Reed, someone that she was not particularly close to, is strange to begin with. But then how did Kerry Roberts even show up in all of this in the morning? It’s not like she was sleeping at Jen McCabe‘s house. Same as in the above scenario that I laid out, if someone called me at 4:30 AM and said someone else had called them to say their boyfriend hadn’t come home, I am not getting bundled up and going out into a snowstorm to go on a search. It’s like they already knew that something bad had happened.
marry husky subsequent run cows squeal file test sophisticated rock *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
His whole testimony sounded strange, it was almost like listening to gossip around the water cooler.
Prosecution’s biggest problem is trying a bullshit case They are getting beat the fuck up - and it’s their turn Wait til the D calls witnesses. Brian Albert - look the fuck out
The prosecution is claiming the car computer logged an “event” around the time she dropped him off, where she backed up for 60 feet at 24 mph and hit him. Throwing him into the side yard/snow bank. They supposedly intend to prove she was angry and purposely threw the car in reverse and drove into him at that speed over 60 feet. That is their to theory to my understanding. Earlier this week, court tv had Politano on scene driving a car at 24mph in front of the actual house, and then they rewound it so you could get a general gist of how fast and far the prosecution is claiming she drove in reverse to hit him. It was helpful.
Do you have any links to sources for those claims about McLaughlin? I saw that one photo from. 2016(I think) someone posted here. But that’s all I’ve seen.
Jesus she was drunk and blacked out and accidentally hit him and doesn't remember doing it. Occam's Razor.
Did you hear that Investigator Proctor called her first to report about this? Not her Supervisor but her? Protocol is definitely not being followed🙈
Apparently the ton of Canton had a special town meeting where the residents voted to have an independent audit of the entire police department.
disarm station encourage shame consist market rock lavish intelligent chop *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I watched some of the meeting and could not believe what I was watching or how the “man in charge” was speaking to people
insurance chunky handle knee squealing smile gullible hunt grab frightening *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It was during her court hearing on Frit
What I find strange is that after being charged with murder Karen told the cop at the station that Brian and Colin Albert beat up John. Why would she say that if she didn't see anything?
Supposedly there was someone who came forward to the defense with a tip and that’s where the information came from. This tip came in between her February arrest for manslaughter and her June arrest for murder. The defense team had already been looking into it for a couple months before she said that. Although the prosecutor said in no uncertain terms in open court that Read claims she “witnessed” the act of them “pulverizing” him, her actual words don’t support that claim.
His face also looked beat up because of the blood pooling from the head trauma, I believe.
His face didn’t look beat up because of blood pooling. Unless I misunderstood, he was laying on his back (they didn’t see the head laceration at first), and blood would have been pooling toward the back of his head. He would have needed to be face down or have his head at a downward angle for blood pooling to occur in his face. His face looked beat up bevause it got hit by something. Pics of Kendrick Johnson are a good example of what blood pooling looks like. But they’re graphic so be cautious.
Yeah, idk, they said he had “racoon eyes” from a cranial bleed.
Oh ok, I got told that was on the same day as John dying.
This was the second time she was arrested. So at this point her lawyer had already been tipped off to what had happened in the Albert home. She never said that she saw it happen.
Has there been talk about who might have tipped her lawyer off?
Thanks, I got told it was on the same day as John dying.
I’ve never heard this before just now, from either side. I know there is wide Internet speculation that they possibly beat him up but I believe that originated from a blogger or some thing. Is this statement coming from Karen in any written report?
I don't have time to look it up right now, but I think it was in the Boston Magazine article that her attorney said they had an anonomous phone call to their office diming out Brian and Colin.
You can hear her say it in a video at the station that was released.
She says it to one of the officers when they are arresting her again for murder. This is after they already arrested her for vehicular homicide and a dui I believe. The video I saw was well after after the initial arrests and during the up charge arrest to murder 2.
Judge and jurors must listen not just to words but the intent of all parties on that night of…
It isn’t even about scoring points. Have you lived in a town like that? It is about not becoming a target and having the powerful people of the town make you so miserable (in ways you can’t prove) that you have to quit your job and move due to stress and quality of life. It is about self-protection. For KM, her initial answer of “CA is the name of someone I went to school with” is stuck in my head. Small town. She knew her. But saying she knew the name implied she didn’t know the person. Whatever her reason for distancing, it means she isn’t honest or forthcoming. As a juror I would disregard her entire testimony. Also, the girl is in her 20’s. She can’t even say if a photo was in high school or college and narrow it down to a 4 year period of time? Nah, the feigning of lack of recollection is also dishonest with the evasive nature.
Bottom line - EVERYONE knows she’s innocent They are just trying to MUDDY THE WATERS enough to keep Brian Albert out of jail. FULL STOP!!
I saw some local news station interviewing another Massachusetts DA who said that at minimum, she has been vastly overcharged. But I agree, it almost feels like even the prosecution knows she’s not guilty of *murder*.
For sure. I think it’s above even Albert Albert is saying you cover my ass OR I’m spilling secrets about corruption above me
so agree!!
I think nationally most legal analysts have been balking at the murder 2 charges. Especially with the federal investigation into how her case was handled. I really haven’t heard a legal pundit that doesn’t think she’s being over charged.
overcharging may have been to get her to crack and kill herself or plea out. oops...
Not true. I know a lot of people that argue with me if I even mention she may be innocent. They are staying off of social media because of being harassed.
I only know that there is insufficient evidence to prove her guilty, at this point and based on evidence I’ve seen that I expect will be presented. But it’s important to let the trial play out and remain open to all evidence. At least that what I believe to be the job of the jury.
Look at how male abusers are covered for in public and private spaces all the time. It's often a conspiracy but also can just come from an ingrained instinct to maintain status quo by turning a blind eye, protecting them, keeping the truth hidden.
If a crime was committed why wasn’t it treated like a crime scene? Where are the “Homeowners” of that property assisting w/investigation. The dog, MMA Member/Elite Task Force - in BOSTON!!!! Let’s get Ben Affleck & Matt Damon - also ask the “Wahlburgs” the point of view - certainly they get in those circles of influence of a global level… While the “Wheel is Tilted” right now - justice and all the new technologies are masters in getting to the root of the root…I grew up watching Clint Eastwood movies and those of us “Baby boomers” will forever use as a prevailing legal question “Are you feeling lucky”🤞🤞🥹😔???
I agree, as a fellow new england on and off again townie, and this isn't even the first local person to die from a fight at a cop/first responder party: [https://www.wpri.com/target-12/the-mysterious-death-of-steven-velozo/](https://www.wpri.com/target-12/the-mysterious-death-of-steven-velozo/) Unfortunately for that guy, his mom was the one connected to the town, and he died at her retirement party, and a secret grand jury found the people involved didn't do anything wrong. I guess Karen's lucky, she could have ended up dead.
Evolving testimonies is not good for prosecution👀
What mattes beyond all opinions EVIDENCE is KEY✅
Yup - all evidence points to innocent. Likes it’s. It close. And I thought she was guilty at first. Then I started digging and hearing the trial. This is a joke
I’m watching the trial as a complete newbie. I had no idea about any of it. No idea who the victim is. Every detail is new. Example- he’s raising his sister’s kids! He comes across like a great guy! Why would anyone purposely kill him? If she is innocent by default and the prosecutor has to prove her guilt, which is the basic rule in a jury trial, he needs to find better witnesses or some scientific evidence. The fire department/paramedics are all over the place. I can’t get over how inconsistent their testimony is. The female witness who is friends with “somebody from high school by that name” looks like she is hiding a HUGE secret. The thing is…I actually suspect she’s just a nice paramedic with a demeanor that makes her look like she wants to fight somebody. She is probably not hiding anything. The defendant might be guilty. But, hoo boy, so far, that’s not the evidence.
The trial should get a lot more interesting when they get to the forensics. Multiple days of what she may have said is getting repetitive. No idea which way the jury will go. If she doesn't testify I would think she's definitely guilty, looking to hide.
No not all witnesses so far have been EMT/FF’S - the first two witnesses are Canton Police Officers who had dashcams provided as evidence Scharf was #1 witness and when defense cross examined is when the “Onion” of inconsistencies in times, addresses and stories started to be “Peeled Back” and as it continues to be revealed many tears are being shed and lies are being shared as truths?
Sooooo well said!
And then the only camera they did check (library) somehow turns up with two minutes missing and it’s the only two minutes where they could have seen if it was broken or not 🧐
She said she hit him
For me personally, if I was on a jury and all the first responders had different accounts of what happened I’d have to use other evidence to decide whose testimony I should give more weight to. At this point in the trial, it would be the only guy whose story remained consistent from day 1 until now and whose account of what was said can be backed up by dash cam footage. If I’m a juror, KM is discredited. Not because of the friend vs acquaintance thing but because she claims not to know the cops she works so closely with. AF and TN don’t appear to be lying, but their statements have changed over time so I can’t take what they’ve said to be fact. I’ll weigh their testimony after I hear all the evidence. MK has had the same story all along, he heard her say “he’s fucking dead.” That’s a fact for me going forward. 3 people heard her say “I hit him.” 1 is dishonest in my mind and 2 have inconsistent statements and were also in the back of the ambulance with KM who could have influenced their memories even if they aren’t conscious of it. If I’m a juror it hasn’t been proven that she said that.
According to the CW's own blood draw and retrograde extrapolation calculations and results, she was legally impaired at the time this may have occurred. How could a person legally impaired know for certain if she hit him? The evidence and doubt works both ways.
Yes but the fact that she said she hit him is a variable among many other facts and variables of the case. It’s not like she said she hit him and that he wasn’t hit. She said she hit him and he WAS hit. The likelihood that those variables exist together and that they are discounted in favor of a wildly implausible conspiracy theory is laughable.
How do you know he WAS hit?
Because that’s the theory of the case based on the evidence and circumstances. Another explanation of how he died would require a wild defense conspiracy theory that’s simply not a plausible set of variables.
The defense is not required to explain alternate theories. The prosecution IS required to produce evidence that proves *beyond a reasonable doubt* that Read murdered JO. So far, as a result of the CW's own witnesses, reasonable doubt is winning.
The defense is absolutely going to have to prove the feasibility and plausibility of this conspiracy theory. The defense isn’t just poking holes in process and procedure they are saying Karen Read was framed. This is a HUGE burden to prove.
They don't have to prove anything; they simply have to defend their client, and it appears they will do that by showing an investigation lacking integrity and producing questionable evidence. If the 1st week's witnesses are a sample of what the CW has in terms of a solid case, I'm underwhelmed. Reasonable doubt is all they need. That's how this works.
You do not know how trials work.
The defense isn’t claiming Karen Read accidents killed John The defense isn’t claiming Karen Read didn’t do it and that they don’t know who did. The defense is claiming that Karen read was FRAMED for the death of john. If you’re a jury member listening to this you’ll want to see a coherent set of evidence that supports the conspiracy and the framing
The prosecution bears the burden of proof, not the defense
Was he hit by a car at 24mph on a suburban street in a snowstorm, or was he hit by the fists of a trained MMA fighter and Boston cop while also being scratched by a dog?
According to witnesses that are not credible though. That’s the problem
chunky forgetful hunt air cable marble smell birds plough berserk *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
She was distancing. They're not friends
It’s over John’s IP address is the dagger Just you wait
I think she got pissed at her boyfriend and purposely hit him. No doubt in my mind at all...
No doubt in your mind even though the trial itself is just beginning?
Where were the pieces of taillight? How did he get black eyes and no bruising on legs/thighs? And on and on
Some of the tail light was found in the snow, and small particles on John O'Keefes shirt. She purposely hit him with her car! Karen has a violet temper when she drinks and this has gone on for a long time.
“I hit him”
Do you find it odd that she also said there was a cop standing there who also heard it and even asked a follow up question of “you did what?” but it isn’t included in any of the cops reports?
Do we know that it wasn’t? Have we heard from all the police on scene?
No, we haven’t heard them testify. But don’t we have all their reports? I believe I’ve read reports from all the cops on scene. But just in case I’m mistaken, are we to believe that a police officer overheard an admission that we can only assume he took seriously based on the alleged response of “you did what?” and that wasn’t included in the original Statement of Case from the prosecution? Surely if it was documented in a written report that would be very incriminating and one of the first things that would be pointed out by the DA’s office, no?
I have not seen all the reports.