OT - Karen Read Trial in Massachusetts

[NJHusky]

If the FBI investigation leads to charges, can you imagine the number or state police involved convictions people will be challenging??

 

[freescooter]

Actually it's like 50-50 he got removed because he's an ass hat but they use the witness remote relationship as an excuse.

Well there is that.

 

[freescooter]

If the FBI investigation leads to charges, can you imagine the number or state police involved convictions people will be challenging??

There is already a major murder case that is ready to seek dismissal because the same Statey was the chief investigator.

 

[Kolumbo]

The snow plow driver's testimony seems powerful. You figure the plow drivers know every angle of the streets and observe everything along the side of the road. The Ford Edge parked on the street - there was probably even a parking ban due to the snow storm,

"The plow driver said he knew the Albert family and delivered pizzas for Chris Albert, including to the home of now retired Boston police officer Brian Albert at 34 Fairview Road.
Loughran, who grew up in Canton, said he was told to report to work for the pending blizzard and made his first of three passes by that address about 2:45 a.m.
“I saw nothing,” Loughran testified when asked if he observed anything in the area of the flagpole.
Loughran maintained he had a clear view of the front yard during his three passes. He said his driver’s seat was raised to see over the plow and the headlights and plow lights were so bright it was “almost like driving with a spotlight.”
Loughran said he was vigilant about looking on both sides of the vehicle for cars, pedestrians and “God forbid, any animals” while plowing.
During a pass about 3:30 a.m., Loughran testified he saw a Ford Edge SUV parked on the street in front of the house by the flagpole where O’Keefe’s body was later found. He said he remembered it because it was unusual.
“The Alberts never had a car parked out front. It was weird,” Loughran said."

"The plow driver said he was never interviewed by anyone in law enforcement until May 2023, but told an investigator for the defense three months earlier about his observations that night."

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I do not see how the judge did not dismiss the case after the prosecution rested its case. After this train wreck of a trial, that is a HUGE red flag on the entire proceeding. Read's team should be very concerned that the fix is in.

 

[M.S.G.]

That is a fair point, the fact that it has even gotten to this stage is concerning..

 

[HuskyHawk]

I do not see how the judge did not dismiss the case after the prosecution rested its case. After this train wreck of a trial, that is a HUGE red flag on the entire proceeding. Read's team should be very concerned that the fix is in.

He can’t unless the defense moves for a directed verdict. But if they get that, it can be appealed. Defense may think it’s best to let it go to a jury. A not guilty is really, really hard to overturn. They wouldn’t even try.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

He can’t unless the defense moves for a directed verdict. But if they get that, it can be appealed. Defense may think it’s best to let it go to a jury. A not guilty is really, really hard to overturn. They wouldn’t even try.

The defense did ask for the directed verdict, and the judge turned them down.

Cannone, however, said she was satisfied that the prosecution had met its burden and immediately denied the defense's motion.

MSN

Cannone is publicly stating that she believes there is credible grounds to convict. Could all of you that were defending the judge not recusing herself weigh in on this?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

He can’t unless the defense moves for a directed verdict. But if they get that, it can be appealed. Defense may think it’s best to let it go to a jury. A not guilty is really, really hard to overturn. They wouldn’t even try.

How could a not guilty verdict be overturned?

 

[Improviser]

How could a not guilty verdict be overturned?

Concept is called double jeopardy

Quoted from Google search below:

Once acquitted, a defendant may not be retried for the same offense: "A verdict of acquittal, although not followed by any judgment, is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense." This applies in all cases where a verdict of not guilty is entered by the Court against a defendant.

 

[temery]

Concept is called double jeopardy

Quoted from Google search below:

Once acquitted, a defendant may not be retried for the same offense: "A verdict of acquittal, although not followed by any judgment, is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense." This applies in all cases where a verdict of not guilty is entered by the Court against a defendant.

Jack McCoy got it done.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Concept is called double jeopardy

Quoted from Google search below:

Once acquitted, a defendant may not be retried for the same offense: "A verdict of acquittal, although not followed by any judgment, is a bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense." This applies in all cases where a verdict of not guilty is entered by the Court against a defendant.

This is why I asked the attorney the question.

 

[KembaStepback]

Auntie Bev really is ridiculous. Karen will be fine. Unfortunately so will the Alberts.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The defense did ask for the directed verdict, and the judge turned them down.

MSN

Cannone is publicly stating that she believes there is credible grounds to convict. Could all of you that were defending the judge not recusing herself weigh in on this?

It’s just the safe thing to do. Sending it to the jury is what the judge will do except in extreme circumstances. That‘s never going to be an error.

 

[CL82]

Auntie Bev really is ridiculous. Karen will be fine. Unfortunately so will the Alberts.

Yeah obviously based on what's been presented in this thread I would think that Read, will be acquitted, but I sure would like to know what happened to the victim. It'll be interesting to see if the FBI charges anyone.

Caveat: I haven't even read article on this thing, but I've read through The Boneyard posts on the subject so I feel like I am competent if they need an auxiliary juror or something.

 

[Improviser]

so I feel like I am competent if they need an auxiliary juror or something.

Be careful what you wish for.

If somehow, there is a hung jury and a retrial, they may call you.

 

[Willi Kid]

The defense did ask for the directed verdict, and the judge turned them down.

MSN

Cannone is publicly stating that she believes there is credible grounds to convict. Could all of you that were defending the judge not recusing herself weigh in on this?

I clerked at the Mass Superior Court a long time ago. Judges almost never issue a directed verdict. They want the jury to decide and they don't like the optics of taking the ball away from the jury after it sat and listened to evidence for days or weeks. After the jury presents its verdict, if the judge thinks no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict based on the evidence presented at the trial, the judge can issue a decision not withstanding the verdict which overrides the jury's decision (JNOV).

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I clerked at the Mass Superior Court a long time ago. Judges almost never issue a directed verdict. They want the jury to decide and they don't like the optics of taking the ball away from the jury after it sat and listened to evidence for days or weeks. After the jury presents its verdict, if the judge thinks no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict based on the evidence presented at the trial, the judge can issue a decision not withstanding the verdict which overrides the jury's decision (JNOV).

If there was ever a situation that called for a directed verdict, it was this one. The only witnesses that claim she did it A) didn't actually see her do it, and B) are either suspects or potential accomplices to a murder themselves. All other evidence that may have captured the event, such as multiple Ring doorbells, turned out to be unavailable.

 

[Kolumbo]

If there was ever a situation that called for a directed verdict, it was this one. The only witnesses that claim she did it A) didn't actually see her do it, and B) are either suspects or potential accomplices to a murder themselves. All other evidence that may have captured the event, such as multiple Ring doorbells, turned out to be unavailable.

They argued. She dropped him off. She drove her car in reverse for 60 feet. He was found dead. That's pretty much the evidence. Certainly not enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if it did happen that way, it could just have easily been an accident. I don't know about directed verdict and appeals, but it really is a mess.

"In Read’s case, the prosecution sought to exclude three of her listed expert witnesses to prevent them from being able to testify in her defense. Without the jury being present, Judge Beverly Cannone allowed the prosecution to question these witnesses on Tuesday at length. Then, the judge announced her ruling:

"Dr. Marie Russell, a retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist, can testify that in her expert opinion, O’Keefe’s arm injuries were consistent with a dog attack. However, the judge made it clear that Russell cannot testify about police activity or what the injuries are inconsistent with.

"Dr. Daniel Wolfe, an accident reconstruction expert, can also testify as to whether the damage to Read’s SUV and O’Keefe’s injuries are consistent with a pedestrian collision. Interestingly, Wolfe’s company was not hired by the defense, but by a “third-party agency.” Wolfe testified that the information that he was provided to analyze in order to render an expert opinion was given to him by the Department of Justice and the FBI. (Earlier this year, the existence of a pending investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts into Read’s arrest and prosecution was revealed.)

Judge Cannone reserved ruling on Dr. Andrew Rentschler, who is a biomechanical engineer and also an accident reconstructionist, and who was not hired by the defense or the prosecution. He was tasked to determine whether O’Keefe’s injuries to his head and arm were consistent with contact with Read’s Lexus SUV. Judge Cannone explained her ruling: “It’s clear to me that in Massachusetts, biomechanical engineers are not qualified to testify as to medical causation of an injury. Only an MD can do that…So I’m going to reserve ruling on the rest of his testimony. There are certain things he can testify, and I’ll hear from [Read’s defense] again before he testifies next week.”

Opinion | The Karen Read murder trial is devolving into a ‘battle of the experts’

Read’s legal team will be heavily relying on expert witnesses to try to convince the jury of her innocence.

www.msnbc.com

 

[Willi Kid]

If there was ever a situation that called for a directed verdict, it was this one. The only witnesses that claim she did it A) didn't actually see her do it, and B) are either suspects or potential accomplices to a murder themselves. All other evidence that may have captured the event, such as multiple Ring doorbells, turned out to be unavailable.

I hear you but both points A and B in your comment are not infrequently present in murder cases. The jury is aware of both points. That's not to say it won't deliberate for 15 minutes and find her not guilty but certainly defendants have been found guilty with such circumstances too.

 

[husky429]

They argued. She dropped him off. She drove her car in reverse for 60 feet. He was found dead. That's pretty much the evidence. Certainly not enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if it did happen that way, it could just have easily been an accident. I don't know about directed verdict and appeals, but it really is a mess.

"In Read’s case, the prosecution sought to exclude three of her listed expert witnesses to prevent them from being able to testify in her defense. Without the jury being present, Judge Beverly Cannone allowed the prosecution to question these witnesses on Tuesday at length. Then, the judge announced her ruling:

"Dr. Marie Russell, a retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist, can testify that in her expert opinion, O’Keefe’s arm injuries were consistent with a dog attack. However, the judge made it clear that Russell cannot testify about police activity or what the injuries are inconsistent with.

"Dr. Daniel Wolfe, an accident reconstruction expert, can also testify as to whether the damage to Read’s SUV and O’Keefe’s injuries are consistent with a pedestrian collision. Interestingly, Wolfe’s company was not hired by the defense, but by a “third-party agency.” Wolfe testified that the information that he was provided to analyze in order to render an expert opinion was given to him by the Department of Justice and the FBI. (Earlier this year, the existence of a pending investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts into Read’s arrest and prosecution was revealed.)

Judge Cannone reserved ruling on Dr. Andrew Rentschler, who is a biomechanical engineer and also an accident reconstructionist, and who was not hired by the defense or the prosecution. He was tasked to determine whether O’Keefe’s injuries to his head and arm were consistent with contact with Read’s Lexus SUV. Judge Cannone explained her ruling: “It’s clear to me that in Massachusetts, biomechanical engineers are not qualified to testify as to medical causation of an injury. Only an MD can do that…So I’m going to reserve ruling on the rest of his testimony. There are certain things he can testify, and I’ll hear from [Read’s defense] again before he testifies next week.”

Opinion | The Karen Read murder trial is devolving into a ‘battle of the experts’

Read’s legal team will be heavily relying on expert witnesses to try to convince the jury of her innocence.

www.msnbc.com

"Dr. Marie Russell, a retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist, can testify that in her expert opinion, O’Keefe’s arm injuries were consistent with a dog attack. However, the judge made it clear that Russell cannot testify about police activity or what the injuries are inconsistent with."

What does this quote mean? She can testify that the injuries were consistent with a dog attack, but cannot testify what the injuries are consistent with?

Help me out here, folks.

 

[HitDog]

Closing arguments tomorrow morning. One hour for each side. Verdict by lunchtime?

 

[CL82]

"Dr. Marie Russell, a retired emergency room physician and forensic pathologist, can testify that in her expert opinion, O’Keefe’s arm injuries were consistent with a dog attack. However, the judge made it clear that Russell cannot testify about police activity or what the injuries are inconsistent with."

What does this quote mean? She can testify that the injuries were consistent with a dog attack, but cannot testify what the injuries are consistent with?

Help me out here, folks.

That was kind of a quirky hair splitting. Basically she can say the injuries look like he was bitten by a dog, but she can't say the injuries are inconsistent with a pedestrian being hit by a car. I've trouble with the second part. I'm sure she's seen hundreds of car versus pedestrian accidents and is competent to form an opinion whether the injuries he received are consistent with that.

 

[NJHusky]

That was kind of a quirky hair splitting. Basically she can say the injuries look like he was bitten by a dog, but she can't say the injuries are inconsistent with a pedestrian being hit by a car. I've trouble with the second part. I'm sure she's seen hundreds of car versus pedestrian accidents and is competent to form an opinion whether the injuries he received are consistent with that.

"Auntie Bev"...It seems like from the limited stuff I've heard/read, she has given the prosecution the benefit of every even moderately close call...interested to hear what those with more info think

 

[HuskyHawk]

That was kind of a quirky hair splitting. Basically she can say the injuries look like he was bitten by a dog, but she can't say the injuries are inconsistent with a pedestrian being hit by a car. I've trouble with the second part. I'm sure she's seen hundreds of car versus pedestrian accidents and is competent to form an opinion whether the injuries he received are consistent with that.

Yes, despite being much more qualified experts than the people the prosecution put forward on average, each one was limited somewhat by the judge. The mechanical engineering guys can't talk about cause of death either, because they aren't MDs. It's a little strange, because almost no MDs would be qualified to testify about the physics behind vehicle impacts. Yet they weren't similarly limited.