Karen Read Trial Day 11 RECAP - A "Black Blob" Seen in the Snow?? | LAWYER EXPLAINS
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- This is the Recap for Day 11 of the trial of MA v. Karen Read.
Primer Video on the Background of This Case: • Who REALLY Murdered Jo...
Full Karen Read Playlist: • Massachusetts v. Karen...
See the trial streams with legal commentary here!
Day 11: • LIVE: Karen Read Trial...
Day 12 MORNING: czcams.com/users/liveBiU3tKaPoWg?...
Day 12 AFTERNOON: • LIVE: Karen Read Trial...
TIME STAMPS:
0:00 Introduction
0:40 State's Witness No. 28 - Caitlin Albert
1:56 State's Witness No. 29 - Tristin Morris
7:10 State's Witness No. 30 - Sara Levinson
11:35 State's Witness No. 31 - Julianna (Julie) Nagel
31:55 What Do YOU Think?
CONTEXT:
On the morning of January 29, 2022, John O'Keefe's body was found on a snow plow in front of the home of fellow police officer Brian Albert. The night before, he had gone to a bar with his girlfriend, Karen Read, as well as some friends and acquaintances, including Brian. Not long after, Karen was charged with John's murder, but her defense alleges that she is being framed by the group of people who met up at Brian's home after the bar closed. Trial begins Tuesday, April 16, 2024 with jury selection.
To Become a Member of Byte Club, you can pick between YT, Locals, or Patreon:
YT Members: / @legalbytesmedia
Locals: legalbytes.locals.com
Patreon: / legalbytes
--------------------
🚨 Our podcast:
Anchor: anchor.fm/legalbytes
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4i3YLop...
Apple Podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Google Podcast: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
--------------------
🚨 We have a @LegalBytes Clips channel for clips from our live streams. Subscribe here: / @legalbytesclips4042
--------------------
Follow me here!
Twitter: / legalbytesmedia
Instagram: / legalbytesmedia
Facebook: / legalbytesmedia
--------------------
🫖 Dragon's Treasure Teas: Visit www.thedragonstreasure.com/?d... for 10% off some delicious teas and to support this channel!
--------------------
Merch: legal-bytes.creator-spring.com
--------------------
#KarenRead #JusticeforJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead
What do you think about the "black blob" testimony? Credible, or no?
I think Julie believes she saw something, but the “blob” and size of it may be her memory trying to make sense of it retrospectively. The reliability of her testimony is questionable because she said the SUV wasn’t parked outside when she went to speak to her brother plus two others who all testified that the SUV was parked in front of their vehicle at that time.
Not credible. People's brains are wired to see bodies, not blobs. She knew she couldn't say body, otherwise she would have to stop the car.
Absolutily not credible!
I believe she believes it, but I think she convinced herself of it after the dact
She wants to say that she saw enough to think there was a person lying there, without saying that she saw a person lying there.
She claims she was concerned enough to say something out loud, but not concerned enough to have a conversation about it. How concerned was she? She wasn't. Drunks getting a ride home in a snow storm are not concerned about dark blobs on other people's lawns. They're certainly not more observant than trained observers, who are looking at their own lawn.
It's all too convenient for credibility.
Vague on details? 'She was drunk.' Overflowing with new details? 'Hey, she wasn't THAT drunk!'
At this point the prosecution has barely proven that John O'Keefe is actually dead...
They actually haven’t proven that at all.
😂
It's so ridiculous and true. 😂
Right!!??? Is this the best I have not one person has seen Karen driving erratically and no one has seen John which tells me he went into the house or maybe into the backyard into the basement was attacked and then came out the same way.
Technically they haven't. We have yet to hear from medical examiner or coroner. Last we heard he was taken from the scene in an ambulance and had to be warmed up before they could officially declare. Well, I guess we heard from his brother and sister in law, so I guess they have that.
The scary part is, if KR couldn't afford a great defense, she would have no chance of avoiding life in prison based on shoddy assed evidence & a bunch of liars.
Well I know the people that are just following the trial don't yet know this but the FBI has also been investigating this from the start & they are gonna testify for the defense saying that there's no way possible with the injuries this man had when he died that there's absolutely no way that Karen Reads car did this damage! There's way more to this case that the testimony this far has revealed. Thank God she has a great defense but the corruption here is so obvious and when you have the FBI testifying in your corner that I think that would override all their attempts to frame her regardless!
What's crazy to me is people thinking the EMT, 6 firefighters , 3 police officers and every member of 2 families plus 11 other people are all liar's lol
@@MyMomo17 I totally see what you're saying. But in a town that apparently has 3 main bars & everyone hangs out or is related, who's going to be the odd man out? I don't think all those people listed lied. Some only repeated what they were told happened from people they respect.
@@Bess9779 That would violate the ethical code of health care professionals for every person who worked for the fire department to just repeat something they heard . I wouldn't think they would risk reputation and career not to mention going to prison for perjury.
@@MyMomo17 then you don't know much about corruption in a small town. What you will see by the end of this trial is the FBI testifying on behalf of the defense saying there's absolutely no way that Karen's car could've possibly caused the death of that young man. And after she is aquitted they are going after the real murder in the Alberts family because the FBI did their own investigation because they were already investigating Boston PD for claims of corruption. It's called circling the wagon through corruption, fear & intimidation!
The way they all “don’t remember“ speaks to the wall of silence that surrounds this case. This is the people close ranks to protect someone in power.
I only heard two people not remember. The things that happened 2 years ago.
You are absolutely correct.
@@MyMomo17it was way more than 2 people. Every one who testified said they don't recall or I don't remember to one extent or another and being that someone died that night I'm sure these things were thought about immediately afterwards and continued to be thought about over & over not just 2 years later like your comment tried to lead ppl to believe! Give me a break.
@@MyMomo17nearly every single witness has said they don't recall something or other what are you talking about
@@MyMomo17yes two years ago but on that day the most traumatic thing has happened, the death of a friend or someone outside your circle...
“Cross examnesia” 😂 😂😂
Omg this is hilarious amd so true!
Is it bad that every time the prosecution presents a witness now I think to myself:
"What are they lying about?"
15:30 5he sounded like she was grunting .
I think the most interesting part of Julie's testimony is that even after it was found that someone died on the front lawn, on the very spot she saw a blob - she told no one! Not the investigators, not the police, in no interviews, nothing. Only now, on trial did this come out. If I saw a dark blob and later it came out that a person had died in roughly the same spot - you better believe I'm running to the police and telling them
I love how invested your cats are in this case
✅
Love the kitties 🐱 i
I've never heard "can you rephrase the question" so much. I watch a lot of court trials
It feels so suspicious, doesn't it?
I've been noticing this too! The judge is really slinging out that and "sustained" left and right.
Right!?! I thought it was just me.
They really only ask defense to “rephrase” questions. When pros asks something, and they don’t get it, they ask him to repeat it, despite asking defense to rephrase. It’s honestly so blatant that I wonder if they were trained to answer that way.
@@bradenculver7457 I actually heard Colin ask the Prosecutor to rephrase or say he didn't understand the question too. Heck I can't understand the question sometimes, it worded in a way to confuse people or avoid being leading.
That Tristen guy being so evasive might make him a suspect if KR is acquitted.
That would be juicy…
I see him as just hating that he is there, he was prickly with prosecution. Wasn't he just talked to May 8th, 2024, like after the trial started? So if he had to take off work to testify for something he thought he wouldn't have to, I can understand that. My spouse would probably be so irritated at such a thing he'd be the same. Especially as Tristan's testimony gives us not much, even if he did remember, what does he add besides yeah I picked up my gf when she said I did? And if there is a coverup, he would lie for her, so I don't see how he was needed at all. He seemed like a grumpy cat. Colin on the other hand (or Julie even) seemed fine on direct but then suddenly had cross-amnesia. That makes me wonder why and what are they trying to hide? Especially compared to Brian Jr. (Who was soo nervous!) Who I really found credible and telling what he knew instead of seeming like he was hiding something.
A comment mentioned Julie's brother stopping by then she goes out to say she's staying then he leaves sounds like a drop off (I am clueless about these things) and while I'm sure there is no evidence of that being true or ppl taking anything so I'm sure it won't come in the trial, it does give some explanation for the seeming to hide something of ppl like Julie. Especially when we see how Sarah is not like that. I'm not trying to accuse anyone but it's like an extra puzzle piece for me that helps explain some behaviors without it being everyone is in on it and putting and covering up. Or maybe Julie has other connections or something that makes her more protective of the Alberts than like Brian Jr. Seems to be.
This kind of case has happened before. Either by a tunnel vision investigation by law enforcement or cover up... bringing new charges against a NEW suspect is almost impossible,because the first trial is used as 3rd party defense.... one example is the Russ Faria case in 2011.... it had elements of both tunnel vision investigation and framing.. the states Star witness was the actual killer . To this day she's never been charged in that case.. unfortunately she killed someone else claiming Russ Faria.... crazy story
Julie seems unusally comfortable with "Lally"...
"i don't remember, I don't remember" did they screen this witness for alzheimer's before having him testify?
✅
_"Were you recently kicked in the head by a horse, perhaps?"_
_"I don't remember."_
I'd rather have him say I don't remember a million times then fabricate testimony about blobs with convenient revolutionary measurements the day of trial or simply saying whatever fits the narrative with no uncertainty then forgetting everything the second cross examination starts. I honestly think he's passed that he got dragged into this mess and they all expect him to fall in line with their narrative. He probably doesn't remember. It was over 2 years ago and the first time anyone spoke with him was a week before trial.
@@CharlieLynne-eu9dz the part that gets irritating is when he's refusing to even give a remote time block, it just makes him seem at best a prick at worst a liar. he could've just said sometime between 8 to 12, instead of just repeating idk idk. even when the defendant is asking him if it was done in the morning or late at night
Julie got SO nervous when she said the blob was 5-6 feet long. Her facial gestures changed completely and she looked immediately uncomfortable right as she started thinking about what to say and waaaay more after saying it. It even looked like she was trying to conceal a smile when she started biting her lip. She is 100% filling in the gaps in her memory with what's convenient.
Tristin was so evasive and combative it definitely made me question him. He was being downright aggressive towards Yannetti. I don’t necessarily think he murdered or was significantly involved in the death of O’Keefe. But it felt like he was covering something up, like why he was called back to pick her up when she could’ve easily stayed the night there. It’s just weird.
I think he just really really didn’t want to be there. It started when he was first called and then of course got worse when he was already expecting the defense to go hard at picking his statements apart.
I think Tristan was doing what his high maintenance girlfriend told him to do.
I’m a litigation/trial paralegal. Mr. I Don’t Remember was a horrible witness devoid of credibility. When I first heard the framing theory, I thought the defense was grasping. It seems like a reasonable theory based on the testimony of the witnesses who were friends, coworkers or acquaintances. “I don’t know” “ I don’t recall” are almost as bad as lying.
Like if for a few questions he said “I don’t recall”, it wouldn’t be a big deal, but when the prosecution is almost throwing you a bone and giving you a broad time frame to attest to, and your response to when you left is “it could’ve been five am” (after you attested it was in the evening), it’s just impossible to believe anything you say, in my opinion. You’re clearly biased, whether is because you’re just uncomfortable on cross or on the side of pros. I saw runkle mention the fact the got the “high maintenance” comment in as being good for pros, which it is, but I don’t think it remedied the sheer absurdity of his evasiveness on even simple questions…
if people didn't see this trial and how shoddy the evidence is i think most people would assume it was a conspiracy theory but ya each witness the prosecution brings out just makes it look more and more like a reality. Idk anything about law but shouldn't the shoddy police work from the first week be enough for reasonable doubt.
Wow so we know it was snowing and one person now says she saw a black blob… I just can’t wait to see Proctor on the stand.
And it only took us 2+ weeks to establish that!
@@hkr667 hey now, prosecution established it was snowing very early on! Obviously, thats the most important fact when there is a dead dude involved. We must know the weather before we even know he even died by some sort of event, priorities my dude, priorities!
When will we see how Karen was involved and how John actually died?
Soon
Lol
I really look forward to your recaps!
Thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying them!
I watch EDB in the background while I work, but I truly appreciate the recap of the pertinent info that I may have missed during the day. Thank you!
It’s interesting she claims the object was 5-6 ft long. People tend to be very bad at guessing the size of objects on the ground from the vantage point of a vehicle. Most guess the dashed line on American roads is somewhere from 2-6 ft instead of the actual 10ft federal standard. If she actually saw him I’d expect her to guess 3-4ft. But she could be self-correcting because she knows his hight now.
Very much so. Especially since he would be lying flat.
especially in a moving car, dead in the night while drunk and trying to recall memories from 2 years ago. I don't think she's consciously lying but her mind could easily make up memories to suit the narrative.
This really stuck out to me, perfect description of his height and almost sounds like the answer you think you should give because you don't know how to describe it cuz you never actually saw it. I was thinking maybe I'd say it looks like a huge dog or a small bear or a garbage bag. My first thought isn't body (even though I watch all these trials).
I think the witnesses all seeming entirely antagonistic towards the defense is hurting their credibility. They feel like they've all group huddled and decided to team up against the defense and it makes them seem like they have an angle to present. It's not helping them.
As a side note, is it odd to others that she can clearly remember what she drank but not where it came from? I'm trying to think on my personal experiences and in every instance I can summon up, I remember where alcohol came from even before remembering what it was. That's even thinking on parties 10+ years ago, let alone 2.5 years. Anyone else? Is that just me?
Him picking her up and with all the other things that don’t add up, just makes me think that the adults told to kids to leave while the adults did the dirty work to create enough distance for them for this incident
So I've noticed several of these witnesses looking down into their lap.... What's that all about? 🧐
Remembering their lines.😅
Opening the water bottle.
@@MyMomo17 you have to look at it in order to open it..ok😐
Lock KR up because some drunk lady saw a black object on the ground but wasn't concerned enough about it to ask the driver to stop /s
Not on topic, but I'm honestly surprised that Mavvie didn't go for that floating candle. My cats would be ripping them down in seconds lol
There are a handful of candles which are no longer connected to the ceiling 😂
Do they always allow witnesses to testify who were admittedly hammered at the time of the “witnessing” 😂😂😂 this is such a joke I feel like I’m watching a comedy
IMO I believe that Brian Higgs hit him with plow on his truck. It explains John being pushed over to the edge of the property. It actually is the only thing that makes any sence. John hitting his head on the hydrant and the plow pushing Johns arm in the glass.
That is a very interesting theory. Thanks for sharing it.
The injury on Officer O’Keefe’s arm is from a dog and his other injuries are completely inconsistent with being hit by a vehicle. Rather, his injuries are consistent with being in a fight, falling backwards and hitting his head on something.
At this point, even if she had murdered him, as a Jurist I would have to say "Not Guilty" as there is nothing credible about these witnesses. Everything so far has been so suspect and evasive that I wouldn't be able to declare a guilty verdict in good conscious. My entire thought process at this point is "What ELSE do you not remember?" and I'm puzzled as to why the Prosecution even thought these witnesses were a good idea...
They're doing nothing but providing reasonable doubt and making themselves look like liars and jerks, I've never seen anything like it!
Especially when they have perfect recall on direct examination.
I didn’t want to believe in a conspiracy but these people are so suspicious and lying about weird things! That’s the problem. I am afraid we’ll never know what happened to poor officer O’Keefe.
I am so done with this trail. The whole thing is people NOT "recalling" anything! So annoying. Karen is going free cause the PoPo be suspect. CASE CLOSED
Second time in a row that your recap video didn't pop up in my notifications or my subscriptions tab (the lives did tho!), it's so weird as I've been consistently watching your coverage of this case and new uploads were previously showing up in both places.
This very recap did not show up in my subscription feed either. Never had that before.
Same
CZcams is just batty like that
They’re all drunks!
I really thought the last witness sounded credible on direct but then on cross, she looked real shady on every single point I initially believed. She sounds like a petulant 13-year-old with a specific agenda (helping the Alberts) on cross.
she's also testifying to things from over 2 years ago she saw while drunk. I've never seen alcohol do anything but impair memories.
Holy crap this Tristan kid….hostile much? I missed his testimony! Gonna have to watch it all 😂
Why was there no video from these cars, are dash cams rare in Mass? Every other person has one in CA. Or did the police not bother to collect them before they were overwritten?
New to your channel and thank you for all these recaps every day!! I started yesterday and sooo helpful - great work!
There's so many sketchy testimonies on the prosecution side. More than half of them feel directly harmful to proving guilt, even without all the questionable gaps of judgement throughout. Not guilty for sure atm IMO.
It's possible he hit John when he went to pick her up and they're both lying!
Because of the sloppyness from all this they have to let Karen off. Too much covering up.
Here is my take:
They had a party pretty much all tanked from the bar came back things got crazy the guys may have been play fighting either A cracked his head before the dog and or they used the dog as a deterrent to come bite him and then they put him out in the snow bank because they were afraid of losing everything or going to jail. Or B....they were play or real fighting the dog got down on the dude, he tried to get away from dog biting him cracked his head passed out they put a coat on and put him to the curb. I do not think that lady Karen had anything to do with this. They are all covering it up for each other.
KAREN KILLED THAT MAN IN WARM BLOOD Cause SHE WAS SEEN WITH HIS FRIEND COLLEN DROPPED HER HUSBAND OFF SO THEY. CAN COME OVER AN LAY UP SOME MORE
It's not really big for the prosecution because they are saying that Karen did this when she dropped him off and she saw this blob almost 2 hrs later after the snow had piled up and now this blog is there which tells me the blob came in after the snow was piling up because poor O'Keefe's body was on 6 inches of the snow in the morning with a dusting on top of it according to EMTs. This is inconsistent with the prosecutor's story of how and when Karen supposedly hit him.
That's because they removed the snow to try to save him.
They want you to believe a 6ft tall police officer just immediately died having been hit by an SUC traveling at slow speeds and didn’t yell for help or fight for his life at all ??? Makes absolutely no sense
From my understanding they are saying a man who was not anticipating spending significant amount of time outdoors after dark was hit by a vehicle and knocked unconscious at which point he quietly froze to death before being discovered early the next morning.
Been waiting for this upload! Thank you!
That Tristan was a joke. The way he kept touching his face made me think he was lying or on something.
I don't understand why, after knowing John died that night, she doesn't come forward and say I seen a dark blob right there. Drunk not saying something I might understand, but 2 years later you mention it?
Defense asked her this too. She had no reason why she didn't.
Thank you!
You are so clever and the recaps are brilliant. Thank you and best of luck.
Thank you for your awesome recaps on this case. You break everything down perfectly! Love seeing your cute pets too! Keep up the great content!
I love seeing sweet Mavvie !!! Thank you for the recap!! :)
Until now I still dont know anything for sure. If I would be the jury I would be very annoyed . Not only for the slow pace but also because police made a complete mess.
I’d love the behaviour panel to look at her testimony, as her eye blinking is off the chart, possible deception.
What if anything is Lally doing? Who if anyone is telling the truth? Where if anywhere is the evidence of guilt? 😂
Ain't no laws when you're drinking claws
objects are not 5-6ft long they would be considered a mass
❤ the white claw clip 😂
What car were the foursome in at the end? I’m just trying to work out the geometry in my head. Her height above the seat when seated, has to see over the door panel through the window, but then steeply enough to see something on the ground. If they’re in a tall vehicle, I can’t say it’s likely, but if in a sedan, then maybe, which brings me back to the question, what vehicle were they in?
Warm greetings from PL, watching occasionally because well, time zone :P qq do we know if jurors are from Canton or they sourced them from somewhere else?
Love the cat ❤
Guys, I don't think he remembers 💀🤣
At this point the defense should’ve also asked this witness how hard it was snowing at this time and was there any accumulation of snow on the ground/lawn and on and around the “black object. The defense should be using the protection’s claim that John was hit in the early hours of the day to prove that it was impossible for 6” of snow to have accumulated under the body in the time frame of when it first started snowing and 1:45am if in fact that was John’s body she saw. So, this seems to support the defense’s claim that that the body was placed there after it’s been snowing for quite awhile. The prosecution need to explain beyond a reasonable doubt how this is possible.
Julie admitted on cross that she never mentioned anything about a "blob" in her initial statement to cops or in her statement to the Grand Jury.
15:30 - did someone burp and sniff?! 😂😂😂
These witnesses are so sketchy and nervous and defensive 😂 also this judge sustains way too many of the prosecution’s objections imo it actually makes them look even less credible like they’re all trying to hide something.
Did anybody else hear a whispered abjection at about 16:39
Yeah, sounded like a woman. I think it may have been the prosecutors co-counsel suggesting that Lally object, but he didn't go for it.
I love this cat!!! 😻
However... i am so bad at recalling times.
Yes, most of us are. But we are bad at remembering all the times. Not remembering just fine when the prosecution asks us, but suddenly not recalling any times when defense asks us.
25:15 ...How short was this truck that she could see the ground beside the vehicle? ...Unless they were driving well away from the curb.
Please correct me if I am wrong - would the son's friends seen or heard the victim in the house/anything at all - if the 'one' friend saw the object on the lawn? Just a thought!
If it was so slippery couldn’t he have slipped, hit the fire hydrant, broken the glass and cut himself rolling around trying to get up?
Loving the new colloquialism crossexamnisia
Beautiful kitty.
I thought the 6 inches of snow was on top of his body before people including Read and Firefighters arrived and tried to revive
At this point in the trial, the only testimony about snow on top of his body is that there was a "light dusting" on him or basically no snow at all.
Here’s my hot take (which I do admit isn’t too great): I actually don’t think there was a conspiracy to murder KR. KR drops John off, bumps into him by accident, he’s drunk (she’s tipsy, drinking with MS even in low amounts can be problematic), he passes out in the snow and freezes to death. Somehow some of the partygoers notice and freak out because a dead guy is on their lawn and I think they (from their testimonies) are entitled/scummy (for lack of a better term) to try to make sure this doesn’t get blamed on them and make sure to cover their tracks, something I get a sense they’re used to doing (with all the phone swapping etc). A VERY poor investigation is then launched, which some of them influence from the back seat because all these local cops are extremely close and protect their own. KR is rich enough to get good lawyers who pick all of this apart and put their microcosm under a microscope. They freak out, cover their tracks by destroying phones etc and we now find ourselves in this v strange situation. In the end, I think they (Alberts etc) shot themselves in the foot because it is (currently) throwing enough doubt in the whole process where it’s no longer beyond reasonable. But pls do let me know if you disagree, it’s just a theory!
I DISAGREE 😂😅HER SIDE DUDE RAN HIM OVER FOR THE INSURANCE 💰
3:33 😂
Weirdest thing to say, "Uhhh I think I mighta saw something, I am not sure what it was"
I have to assume she wasn't quiting what she claims to have actually said. Or else It is almost certainly false.
Don’t like whatever in the court footage is making that noise that sounds like the girl from The Ring. Love your coverage though!
seems like the prosecution is aiming to create enough nuggets of speculation that Karen Read might have done it. It wouldn't be proof beyond a reasonable doubt but it would be super sneaky if it worked to get a conviction
What happens if someone actually doesn’t know something or isn’t sure about when something happened? I personally am quite terrible at those kinds of things, thanks to the lovely combination of autism and ADHD that make up my brain’s operating system.
Like she said in the video, it’s at least possible to use context clues and typicalities to approximate when something likely happened. The problem with Tristan’s responses isn’t him not remembering things here and there- lawyers can expect memory to be fuzzy, especially if nothing of note happened- it’s that he is absolutely hell-bent on stonewalling the defense at every turn for things that probably aren’t that consequential. It makes him come across as obnoxious at best and suspicious at worst.
If Allison and Collin are so close, why was there supposedly a month between her text messages that night and the next ones that showed like Feb 20. So Jan 28/29 to Feb 20???? Check the screenshot. Seems like they might have fabricated that exchange later and then screenshot it without the real date.
If these people genuinely have memory issues to this degree I don't understand how they have jobs and function in society
I just think the craziest part about all this is saying karen went fast enough, IN REVERSE to kill a man with her car. Has anybody ever heard of a case where someone got hit by a car in reverse and died and that didn’t Iinvolve the person getting smashed between the car and another car or the car and something else?
IDK but many people hit things when backing up.
I think the idea is she reversed multiple times after knocking him over once? But at that point I would think this would be extremely noticeable to the people in the house, between the lights switching and the sound of the tires, impact, and I would assume John yelling. Either way, you’re right, it really taxes one’s suspension of disbelief.
So is the defense saying that Karen Read didn't say the "I hit him I hit him" at all? Because I could see prossibly still a bit tipsy and so early in the am thinking she might have, but then being like, no I remember him going inside, or is the prosecution trying to say she confessed then recanted?
I dunno, as of right now if I was a jury I would for sure say not guilty for the murder charge, but would have to deliberate on the vehicular manslaughter one, I think its possible she hit him, didn't realize it, and left. But they have done nothing to prove to me she meant to do it, or even knew about it till the next morning when she went to get him. Im kinda leaning towards not guilty cuz there is at least some reasonable doubt on her doing it at all too, and possibly them in the house doing something. The only thing with that is, why leave his body there, if they killed him why not dump him somewhere else?
If you "think its possible she hit him" then you must find her not guilty, because prosecution MUST prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did so.
@@hkr667 I know, but the alternative being someone in the house did it, why dump the body there is the only thing that makes me think it would have to be her. But I guess they could have beat him up, and he stumbled outside after the fight and passed out in the snow and the people that beat him up just thought he left? I just found out about this case tho, has the ME testified yet on the autopsy results?
@@TheRubberDuck77when people ask why they would put him outside, I also wonder why would she kill him at a house full of cops? Also, would she have had to known for sure he was dead, before she left, or would she risk the chance he wasn’t dead and he be able to tell everyone she hit him?
@@michellecolon8293 Yeah, I for sure don't think she did anything on purpose or even thought she did when she left, AT MOST she accidently hit him and honestly didn't know till she got back there the next morning.
I agree she may not have known but why was she panicking at 5 am and calling the relatives of the Albert's to take her to help find him and led them straight to where he was.
Who dipped that cat in white paint?
Soooo I pulled up the house on Google street view right, and what the witness who saw the black SUV said, is really consistent with what Karen said, she waited till he got in side, like inching up till he made it to the door, here's the thing, there are 2 front doors. So, it's possible he was actually walking up at that time. The witness could be focused on the SUV and not see him walking up the driveway.
But then with the black blob, I think the lawyer did a good job of showing that she didn't think it was a body at the time, but he kinda asks the same question over and over and over, can't we get an obj asked and answered? but anyways, yeah the fact the 2 people that would have been on that side of the car didn't see it, but then they could be facing the other people or whatever so looking away, she would be the one looking toward the passenger side while talking to people... but the thing that gets me, and where I thought the lawyer was going with that line of questioning was... if you didn't think it was something important why bring it up at all? to me her seeing some black object in the yard/side of road but not knowing at all what it was but then bringing it up is kinda fishy to me, like if you are looking close enough to bring it up then you are looking close enough to know what it is.
I guess if it was him, its one of those things maybe her brain on some level did realize what it was but then convinced it self I couldn't have seen what I thought I saw or something. Also, it could have been him but not Karen that killed him as there was enough time between Karen leaving and Julie seeing the blob that someone inside the house could have killed him in the basement then taken the body outside, or even possibly a battered victim stumbling outside on his own and falling there
Of course it's Karen Reads SUV ! Even Read says she drove John there at 1230. The pulling up 3 times sounds like when people are arguing over whether to go in or go home.
My point was to highlight what's been put in front of the jury. As of the end of Day 11, there's a suggestion that it is, but the jury hasn't seen any statements by Karen Read or anything else that confirms it.
@@LegalBytesMedia I see your point from their perspective. I love your channel you don't take sides of either defense or Prosecutor 🥰
@@LegalBytesMedia I must have heard it in opening statement.
I think he's just a bit of a dolt and the twisted convoluted rapid fire questions much like an interrogation is probably confusing which you know is the point of the rapid fire questions. He seems to be afraid of being called a perjurer. That's my opinion.
🌹❤️🌹❤️🌹
If I was Karen I would be seething. Like best case scenario she’s acquitted. But then what? They just drop this case? It would be so defeating just seeing all of these people in this town basically at the least look the other way and be complicit in trying to put you behind bars and there’s little to no vindication with great the jury decided something I already knew… I wasn’t guilty. And to be out all that money from this defense. I would need years of therapy lol
JUST SAD SHE HIT HIM THEN WENT HOME TO LAY UP WITH ONE OF HER SIDE DUDE 😂😅I SOLVED THE CASE IT SO OBVIOUS WHAT SHE ABOUT
I think Julie is suggestible. After having drank and awakened the next day and seen the news she may have envisioned it in her minds eye and feels guilty bc someone died. Kind of sounds like something I would do and then beat myself up for it. I truly feel sorry for the young people in this case. I think it's the crooked adults that are covering up a tragic accident. And NO I don't think Colin killed John O
If i hear this judgr sustain to one more objection for the prosecution when the answer would be of upmost importance, im gonna rip my hair out. And no this person does not seem credible at all!
❄️❄️❄️❄️❄️🔥🐤🕵️🧑🔬🧑🔬
I've seen better testimony in the YSL trial... and that is a 💩show
wtf
Gg
I am leaning more and more to it was an accident. His feet went out from under and he landed on the back of his head.
You’re saying in the snowbank he slipped then died? Curious your thoughts on the friend googling how long it takes for someone to freeze to death hours before his body was “discovered” in the snow?
@@mickd5930I think they’ve said it was Karen that told her to Google that at around 6am. But surely they’ll get to that this week
Where did his other shoe go with this theory seeing as they haven't shown that yet.
@@mickd5930That's the defense opinion the investigator opinion is she googled it at 605 after they went with Karen to find him after Karen asked them to drive her there to look.
@@amandamandamandsLater that day there was a snow plow.
Maybe Karen planed a cover up by bumping her car into John's car later and then calling people to help her find him who were related to the Albert's. If she knew she hit him.🤔