We've been waiting for nearly two months for the Commonwealth to tell us how and why Karen Read killed John O'Keefe with her car, but now it's clear that they don't know either.
The jury instructions clearly do modify the indictment to cast a broader net. I don't know the case law but it feels shady. Seems probable CW would settle for anyting to avoid losing (i.e., further humiliation) right now. Maybe the CW, in close partnership with PD, felt invincible when this all started. But they're now getting schooled. Think of the gradual, public humiliation being broadcasted globally. The CW and their 'allies' are getting a small taste of how much worse this can get.
It's hard to imagine their level of humiliation. I say this with an open mind, but there isn't much evidnce to go on, sadly--especially when a simple text log can't be properly interpreted. I'm pretty sure any expert who actually works on the back end can explain to you in 25 words or less what the logs mean. Then she'll tell you to just go look at the g-ddamned server-side Google logs, Boomer.
This trial has been a remarkable experience with your insight, YouTube livestreams, and articles.. I cannot imagine being a juror on this case or worse (YSL).
Over your career, have you seen anything close to this level of heightened corruption?
It is my understanding that the Karen Read jury has two attorneys.
I have to think that attorneys on the jury is a big problem for the Commonwealth. In my own experience, it's rare to see a law enforcement culture closing ranks to protect obvious problem cops like we see here - there are enough good ones who realize that the bad ones poison the well. Funny enough, when I was researching the constructive amendment case law I was looking in the First Circuit (where Massachusetts is) and kept coming across cases involving corrupt Boston police officers just by sheer coincidence. But it's a problem everywhere - here's a fairly recent case from Hawaii that's got some common themes with falsifying evidence and reports to frame an innocent man: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/former-honolulu-police-officers-sentenced-framing-innocent-man-crime
It's insane this continues. And is it true that there is deleted or disappeared Ring footage showing Karen get home around 12:41 AM whereas the incident they are saying occurred around 12:45 AM? I read this morning she left a voicemail and you can also hear her garage closing, and walking into her home around the same time.
The Commonwealth has absolutely no idea what their timeline is. It was during Trooper Proctor's testimony that the defense elicited that Trooper Dicicco had watched the Ring video and taken notes. His notes said at 00:41 there were taillights in the driveway, "I think she arrived home." But according to Trooper Proctor they never got Ring camera footage for 00:41.
I didn't address that one specifically. There's probably a factual basis for it from the various testimony about "harassment" and Jen McCabe attributing it to Karen (even if it was just her belief without substantiation). But it's a limiting instruction given for the defendant's benefit, so the court will usually defer to the defense on whether to give it or not. They could prefer not to highlight that testimony and take the strategic risk to waive the limiting instruction, and that decision is usually respected by the court.
The jury instructions clearly do modify the indictment to cast a broader net. I don't know the case law but it feels shady. Seems probable CW would settle for anyting to avoid losing (i.e., further humiliation) right now. Maybe the CW, in close partnership with PD, felt invincible when this all started. But they're now getting schooled. Think of the gradual, public humiliation being broadcasted globally. The CW and their 'allies' are getting a small taste of how much worse this can get.
It's hard to imagine their level of humiliation. I say this with an open mind, but there isn't much evidnce to go on, sadly--especially when a simple text log can't be properly interpreted. I'm pretty sure any expert who actually works on the back end can explain to you in 25 words or less what the logs mean. Then she'll tell you to just go look at the g-ddamned server-side Google logs, Boomer.
This trial has been a remarkable experience with your insight, YouTube livestreams, and articles.. I cannot imagine being a juror on this case or worse (YSL).
Over your career, have you seen anything close to this level of heightened corruption?
It is my understanding that the Karen Read jury has two attorneys.
I have to think that attorneys on the jury is a big problem for the Commonwealth. In my own experience, it's rare to see a law enforcement culture closing ranks to protect obvious problem cops like we see here - there are enough good ones who realize that the bad ones poison the well. Funny enough, when I was researching the constructive amendment case law I was looking in the First Circuit (where Massachusetts is) and kept coming across cases involving corrupt Boston police officers just by sheer coincidence. But it's a problem everywhere - here's a fairly recent case from Hawaii that's got some common themes with falsifying evidence and reports to frame an innocent man: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/former-honolulu-police-officers-sentenced-framing-innocent-man-crime
RE attorneys being on the jury, I too think should be a godsend for the defense, but you have to wonder which 'club' they're in (if any).
It's insane this continues. And is it true that there is deleted or disappeared Ring footage showing Karen get home around 12:41 AM whereas the incident they are saying occurred around 12:45 AM? I read this morning she left a voicemail and you can also hear her garage closing, and walking into her home around the same time.
The Commonwealth has absolutely no idea what their timeline is. It was during Trooper Proctor's testimony that the defense elicited that Trooper Dicicco had watched the Ring video and taken notes. His notes said at 00:41 there were taillights in the driveway, "I think she arrived home." But according to Trooper Proctor they never got Ring camera footage for 00:41.
Sorry if I missed this - did you go over the consciousness of guilt on page 14 for witness intimidation?
I didn't address that one specifically. There's probably a factual basis for it from the various testimony about "harassment" and Jen McCabe attributing it to Karen (even if it was just her belief without substantiation). But it's a limiting instruction given for the defendant's benefit, so the court will usually defer to the defense on whether to give it or not. They could prefer not to highlight that testimony and take the strategic risk to waive the limiting instruction, and that decision is usually respected by the court.
Thank you for the clarification. I read it as an attempt by the CW to say KR intimidated witnesses and deleted ring video.
I'm sure they'd like the instruction because it sounds more definitive on the facts than any of the testimony was.