I'm an old, retired criminal defense attorney/ prosecutor. JD, SJD, PhD. It raised flags with me when Cannone didn't poll the Jury on each count, NOR did she allow the Parties to SEE the notes, etc sent from the Jury. But THEN chose to speak to the Jurors privately afterward? ALL of that is HIGHLY unusual. I can't help but wonder if Cannone KNEW they were unanimous on those 2 counts, but suppressed it, illegally "ordering" not to speak about it. Or conveying that impression. PRIOR TO Jury Deliberations, there was a last-minute removal of a Juror. Or were there 2? ANYWAY. She had the Clerk pull numbers out of a bucket to make it final who would be deliberating. BUT. Judge and Clerk DENIED the Defense's request to check the bucket and numbers for accuracy. Interestingly, Jurors THOUGHT to be Read supporters were removed, and Jurors THOUGHT to be prosecution supporters added. AND. The Bailiffs in this trial were STATE POLICE, not County Sheriff's Deputies, as I've witnessed in EVERY local- court trial I've ever seen. MORESO since the MSP was the agency getting ripped to pieces in the trial. VERY ODD. ON TOP OF the mountain of other garbage and insanity of this trial, it EXPONENTIALLY EXPANDS suspicion that this entire Matter -- with the increased likelihood of Judicial Misconduct - blows the doors off.
Don't forget also... She states its random which alternates will be dismissed when names are pulled from bucket BUT picked the foreperson BEFOREHAND. How did she know whether that juror would be randomly selected and removed or not... So obviously the forepersobs number couldn't be in there. Also 3 jurors were dismissed. All thought to be KR support. 2 were alternates removed and 1 was questioned and removed before the selecting
Shes a monster.. this sucks now.. But I swear I thought bev wouldn't poll the jury and also told them to Take their time, Meaning to me anyway, that the prosecutor didn't do their job. Doesn't anyone else???? And now they can't talk to anyone.. 'you can but I strongly suggest you dont" it was "Her decision, her court, her blah blah blah " she's a monster!!!.
@@adriennem7927 and you’re brainwashed, what you said is bull. She’s doing her job..she’s in on it too huh? You guys are so far up that murderers behind I swear but yet these slimy attorneys write this outrageous motion and you find excuses? Get out Karen’s colon. 24 mph in reverse 60 feet and I HATE YOU VM right after? She did it!! She admitted it.
Ain't bev was not going to even let AJ fix that bcuz of the confusion. Then she made it harder fo4 them. Her doing. "ITS MY COURT, ALL ABOUT ME" She's a monster.
There was a crooked man, and he walked a crooked mile, He found a crooked sixpence against a crooked stile; He bought a crooked cat which caught a crooked mouse, And they all lived together in a little crooked house.
It’s a load of crap but the fact they said the other two were jurors is just part of their slime. If anyone is corrupt it’s these attorneys and narcissist Karen who is now believing her own lies.
Since I saw it so much in live chat… once dismissed the jurors ARE ALLOWED to discuss the case. They can talk about the case on the phone. They can chat with coworkers. They CAN discuss on a zoom. These jurors came forward AFTER DISMISSAL.
@@cocochanel1399yes, and the judge stated that she was going to meet with the jury immediately after court was dismissed. The question is did the jury give Judge Cannone this information at that time?
Somewhat amplifying your point, Juror deliberations are NOT secret. The rule against talking outside of deliberations before the jurors are dismissed is NOT to maintain secrecy. It is to prevent jurors' thinking from being contaminated in any way. Once they're dismissed, they need not talk, but can, talk about their actions and thinking as much as they want.
When Bev talked to the jurors she made it SEEM like the jurors were still very limited about what they were allowed to talk about. That’s why the juror who contacted the defense said they were only going to alert the attys about the results, not any content, of deliberations. IOW she mislead them hoping she could sweep her major f up under the carpet.
go back and look at verdict watch. Lally said keep deliberating and defense wanted to mistrial. Don’t start with judge failure. Defense should have spoken up. They ran their lying butts the whole trial!! No failure and this is another slimy attempt by defense to get a guilty client off..she’s a murderer!
I was at the courthouse everyday, not w the KR supporters, just walking around the area because it's near my gym. I met my son today in S. Boston and there were KR supporters across the SBPD where Proctor was re-homed and I'm back!!!
@@JK-yf2vl yes! I found that so unprofessional! We’re all tired, yet do our jobs! She seems like she goes home and hits the Pinot noir, no shame in that, but do your job ma’am!
@@PEBBLEZ21I love how every comment of yours is acting like we're all just blind fans of KR's when in reality we found the very obvious cover-up to be pretty blatant and everyone on the prosecution seemed to be VERY bad at their jobs... but nah, we're all just huge fans of this random lady from MA. It's got nothing to do with what was presented in court/how the prosecution was laughably incompetent... nah.
This judge was a disgrace much like Proctor! Her disrespect, obvious disdain for the defense, stopping court abruptly for no good reason, not polling the jury, screwing up the form they were to use....she should be disbarred. Proctor shouldnot be the only one hung out to dry
In from CO; I share some of your feelings. I can’t cite exact rules for allowing Judge’s discretion, but something smells like month-old, rotten, fish, IMO. Love this chat! Always goes in HARD, & piques interest- 👍🏽⚖️💪🏽
@@PEBBLEZ21Where hv you been past 50 years? Nothing new in your opinion re small/lg communities “taking sides…” Come on. You must be a nearby community resident, or hv knowledge WE didn’t hear/see. Be better-do better. Character assassinations just not 🆒, in chats, imo! Mine. Doesn’t nd to be YOURS; can we agree to disagree? Unless… and then, perhaps you SHOULD involve yourself in this case: formally. This is a tough-as-nails chat. Throwing around allegations/maligning othr opinions (!), without citations, feels dangerous… Not personally/physically, of course; but expect pushback! I’m glad you’re involved & feel passionate-but at end of day, your commentary isn’t providing chat w/ anything tangible to consider. Think on it. Critical thinking requires facts, & knowing facts, requires learned study (Google isn’t studying); people nd to KNOW positions are steeped in shareable facts-IMO. Okay: I’m out for now- ✌🏽⚖️🧨📚
1) the judge was extremely incompetent for this trial. 2) she did not make sure the the papers made sense for guilty not guilty. The defense argued with her about this… 3) this whole case should be dropped against Karen. Prosecutor did NOT prove guilt. Most of the witnesses for prosecution were liars and trying to save their behinds by getting rid of phones, so called butt dials, selling the house, redoing basement, getting rid of dog…there was no proper investigation at all on any of the police officers and families such as the Alberts and McCabes and others.
… is polling the jury is a lost art? They were confused for sure! The instructions took awhile to nail down and still were, obviously, unclear. Wow. This is wild
@@cocochanel1399 I don't understand. The jury form should have been completed ? Was it? If the form was not completed why The judge didn't ask for it to be/clarify - if the jury was hung on all counts. ? No one saught that ? Didn't require a poll of nos of guilty vs not guilty, just confirming the individual countss were considered and not agreed. Usually the judge asks the foreperson plus she rushed miss trial and excused the jury. Typical of her unprofessional conduct.
@@caroline-brisbane8577I feel like they didn't want to touch the verdict form at all until they decided unanimously on everything and I guess none of their notes indicated that they were hung up on any particular count. Regardless, the format of the verdict slip is confusing. Each charge should have its own section or page with clear G/NG for each.
@@jediknight4316that is absolute not true. The was a unanimous “not guilty” on the 2nd degree murder and hit and run charge. They were stuck on the lesser charges and not polled so no one knows what that outcome was
She did nothing wrong. This motion is ridiculous. These attorneys have pushed way hard in this trial. They wanted the mistrial and they had time to object. Matter of fact THEY wanted it early and LALLY argued to let them continue. To say they couldn’t say anything is a lie…they were smiling and hugging then went outside with a huge gathering. Give it a rest. This is more of their slimy.
@@PEBBLEZ21be quiet, Jennifer. We know how bad you looked on the stand and your repeated comments that blithely ignore all evidence (or lack thereof in the prosecution's case) doesn't help. How about you explain the whole "how soon to die of cold" at 2 am Google search? Oh wait...
Aunt Bev( judge) could not get out of the courtroom any faster… to talk to the jurors, I wonder what she said to them. Maybe it’s me, but I never have seen someone so irritated, am I wrong the way I assessed Bev? She was not happy. I’m glad I’m a surgeon
I absolutely agree! It doesn’t matter what the reason is, if the jury can’t agree then it’s out. When people say “well the attorneys will be better equipped to moved forward and prove their case the 2nd time around”, nope, they had the first chance and that should’ve been good enough.
This. Prosecution shouldn't get a second bite at the apple. They should get one chance to prove it to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and anything less than twelve for guilty should be an acquittal.
I started explaining this case to a friend. Discussed the divisiveness and some of the testimonies. My friend immediatly started defending the cops and assumed KR was guilty. I thought....YES- this was a great example of how people pick sides with so much conviction. My friends father was a Seattle cop.
Well I guess you gotta hear all the evidence before you can make a decision. When I first started reading about the case, I thought she was guilty too, because what other explanation could there be… little did we know….
To be fair, this case was absolutely unbelievable! I had the same reaction at first too. I don't like TB and his behavior was very off putting to me so I didn't trust his claims, but I checked out more credible sources. I still went into the trial sitting on the fence that maybe she did accidentally hit him. This is really a case where someone needs to see the corruption for themselves.
No, the defense did. They didn’t object. But again, yall are so in love with Jackson and his Weinstein defending used car salesman personality that you want to put everything on literally everyone else except Jackson and Karen Read.
The judge should've declared on each charge rather than just saying a mistrial all together. Count 1- not guilty Count 2- hung Count 3- not guilty So she's not being retried on all charges but just Count 2 bc the way she ended the trial, the state can retry her on all charges. But that would be double jeopardy. Bev messed up.
That mistrial declaration went so fast! I was so confused about why she didn't ask the jury anything on the record, she just dismissed the jury. I assume that's not strictly disallowed in the rules but I think the rules should be much clearer in this area, it invites judges to just kinda do whatever they want with a hung jury.
Unfortunately before the same judge asking her to admit she is as corrupt as the cops who blatantly lied and not even well! Good luck with the outcome!
The Jury Foreman, judging from his notes to the Court, seemed very intelligent & articulate. Why on earth wouldn't he specify that they were deadlocked on 1 charge but unanimous on other? This is mind boggling if true!
Actually it was 1 juror who reached out directly to defense attorneys, and the other 2 were individuals that had spoken to jurors who then told defense what the juror said. Papa Tragos was very clear on that differentiation. Either way, it is crazy I agree and hopefully KR will be acquitted on charge 1 & 3 !
I retract that. There was ONE juror that reached out and 2 people reaching out about 2 other jurors. Not really that impressive since so so many people are very interested in the outcome of this case.
Her rights were violated regarding the investigation lead by ex trooper proctor that was botched and violated her rights should be thrown out and dismissed
This will go down as the most expensive DUI case defense in history. But if Karen goes down for DUI, then everyone else who drove a vehicle that night should as well.
I’m so confused by this. I didn’t think that OUI/DUI as a separate charge was even on there as an option. They got her blood alcohol level by breach of HIPPA from a 72 hour mental health hold a billion hours after she actually drove to Fairview. None of it makes sense. The jury was confused by the verdict slip with no “not guilty” option, pressured, and intimidated by the glaring McAlberts. (Bad plan by Paul. Backfired)
This is great for Karen 🎉🎉🎉 bad for judge bev n DA. And the fbi is very involved in this case. Proctors sitting at home where he belongs n the corruption hopefully is held accountable. FKR ✌️ ❤
It's not that great , 9 out of 12 believed she killed him with her car. Doesn't bode well for the retrial. Vehicular manslaughter under the influence still carries 15 years.
Did you see her face when the last two auto wreck experts got up on the stand? She had a furious look, she was twirling her glasses, and looking at them with disgust. Any moron would know that a car does not cause only those injuries? Even if he was suspended in the air sideways, head only toward the car, backwards facing, he still had to come down. What...a dog bit him while he was in the air? He had no spine injuries? Check Waddles Triad principles.
The text response recorded by Informant B on David Yanetti's affidavit is crucial to the status of the second charge. The text in question reads: "No one thought she hit him on purpose or even thought she hit him on purpose [sic]." Obviously, the statement is saying the same thing twice, but what if the last two words were omitted and the second part of the statement read: "...or even thought she hit him"? I maintain that is likely the way the statement was intended to read, given the use of the word "even". That word "even" is used for emphasis and is intended to distinguish the second statement from the first, making a statement about the act itself ("hit him") whereas the original statement was more focused on intent ("on purpose"). If that is true, the second charge should also produce a NOT GUILTY verdict because one of the primary conditions that she struck Officer O'Keefe was not sufficiently proven to the jury. But the verdict form itself and accompanying instructions were so confusing that some jurors were unsure as to what they were voting on. If the jurors were plainly asked, "Do you believe the CW proved that Karen Read struck Officer O'Keefe with her SUV?" If they all were not convinced, she needs to be acquitted of all charges, period.
@@JulieMiller-of2dl Possibly, but why even say it as two separate statements? Why not just say "No one ever thought she hit him on purpose"? I don't know, hopefully the full jury will be able to clarify their deliberations and decisions.
Or you could insert "wanted to", so that it reads "No one thought she hit him on purpose, or even thought she [wanted to] hit him on purpose.". Which would make sense. However, until the jurors are actually asked what happened during their deliberations, this is just speculation.
Exactly & Jen too that is one nasty cold mean person. Her big nasty mouth gets her in lots of trouble & cannot tell the truth. Was so snappy during her testimony.
This Judge definitely dropped the ball. You & your Father are lawyers so this seems simple to you. If I were a a jurist in this case… 1) I would never have been comfortable going back with questions to this Judge about the form. Did not find her approachable. 2) This form was too confusing & conflicting and I don’t believe this Prosecution team proved their case. 3) No amount of being sent back to deliberate longer would have made me change my opinion or my vote. It’s been drilled into me that to find a guilty verdict it has to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt… That did not happen. This Prosecution team did not prove it. Period. End of story.
In their opinion but that isn’t true. Was it a not guilty? Nope!! Proved it to me and apparently some jurors. 24 mph in reverse 60 feet with a I HATE YOU VM right after?? She did it. She snapped and jammed it into reverse..see ya popsicle.
@@PEBBLEZ21 The added problem was that the CW's experts were not qualified to prove their case. The '60 feet in 24 mph' was based on an error by Trooper Paul. KR was not in possession of the car when that key cycle occurred. So the CW really did not prove their case.
Also, his injuries were not from getting hit by a car, more likely, a fight. Dog bites.. his watch info, flight of stairs.. way too much doubt. Not guilty.
@@PEBBLEZ21 Hello a 3rd time Pebblez, I asked you about your opinion in my previous reply and this comment has a few answers. So, you believe Trooper Paul's version above the Fed's witnesses "CrashDaddies" testimonies, correct? Now, we are learning that at least on 2 of the charges including Murder2, there was a "Not Guilty" verdict decided. Isn't it hard to add another "accident" to the case against KR? There is another (much easier to believe) explanation for the key cycle info. By the way, try to go 24mph in reverse for 60 ft. I tried but couldn't. I can believe the "I Hate You" voice messages were because she was drunk and angry, not because she had just killed him. Is "popsicle" a local insult? Thanks
Peter, so many times during the Karen Read trial I felt that the judge showed absolute bias towards the prosecution! Now with the information that has come to light that the jurors unanimously voted not guilty for counts one and three, I absolutely believe that the judge knew this information and that's why she did not allow the jurors to be polled or questioned or the notes to be read by either party! Then to top it off the judge questions the jurors privately! I have never heard of this happening in any trial! It is unbelievable what is happening in our country with our legal system! Judges are off the reservation and doing as they please without following the law! This is outrageous! I pray that a full investigation is done and that if they find that the judge in fact withheld this information she should be removed from the bench immediately! God help us all!!
@@citygirl729 total supporter of KR, however...... Its actually normal for judges to speak with the jurors after a trial, just to thank them. And not one juror has claimed bev knew
Yes I agree that judges always speak to the jurors afterwards but it's usually not done in total secrecy without the attorneys present. I really wish that the jury forman would have asked about what to do in regards to charge 1 and charge 3 since they were not sure about what to do. If they in fact came to a unanimous verdict in each of those charges it just seems really unfair to have to try her again on those charges instead of just charge 2 for manslaughter.
@@PEBBLEZ21How so? Otherwise, your comment is merely YOUR opinion, which you’re obviously entitled to, but “brainwashed” implies that you are in fact, in possession of information we DO NOT hv. Feelings are feelings. Facts are cited… in any/every area of expertise, business, academia. Check b4 wreck, please. Or, just clearly state your comment is YOUR opinion: solely. ⚠️✌🏽
A great opportunity to take a step back and review what a standard jury form should look like, and what the standard instructions to a jury should be, so that there isn’t a repeat of this sort of problem.
YES! Poor layout of complex information really peeves me and if I had been on that jury I probably would have drawn up a better version and told the judge to use my version next time! (That probably would have gone poorly but it's like nails on a chalkboard for me!)
She won't because she's corrupt. She should have asked this and given the defense a chance before dismissal of the jury plus not using NG option under every charge.
The judge SHOULD have polled the jury to ask if they were hung on ALL charges OR, if NOT, which SPECIFIC charge(s) they were hung on!! IF she had ASKED them that, they could have been INSTRUCTED at that time to be sure to check the verdict(s) they AGREED on!! This judge should have NO CHOICE but to hold a hearing with all 12 of these jurors to determine if they unanimously agreed that Karen was “not guilty” on 2 of the charges, as Karen’s CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to NOT be subject to “double jeopardy” would be VIOLATED if what her defense counsel is saying is true and she’s faced with being tried again on those SAME charges!!
@PEBBLEZ21 maybe YOU need to stop living in the state PD's/prosecution's behind. You clearly are prone to ignoring when they don't provide any substantial evidence to their claims... so how does that police boot taste?
I was on a jury trial where we had 8 counts to consider and each was clearly treated as seperate. 5 of the counts we could find either at the felony or misdemeanor levels. We went through each and turned in our decision for each count. I can see how this form would be really confusing.
I’m extremely frustrated that possible juror IGNORANCE is playing such a roll in the dispensing of justice. It feels INEXCUSABLE to me, that when the jury came back, that they didn’t tell the judge “We WERE able to agree NG on two charges, but unable to agree on the third, and therefore we are hung.” And if not, the JUDGE should have ASKED them (re: each charge) WITHOUT having to be prodded by ANY attorney before declaring a mistrial. What if they agreed on GUILTY to some charges but didn’t mark it?? This feels like such an injustice… never mind the fact that it is BAFFLING to me that 8 jurors believed she hit him with her car. 😏
@@GH-oi2jf agree, verdict form was confusing because the top option was Not Guilty on 2nd degree and ALL lesser charges, so they technically couldn't select that option if they were deadlocked on some of the lesser charges. There should have been a guilty/not guilty option by each count to make it clear.
I think they should drop the cop frame job but stick to the horrible investigation and bias by law enforcement etc. Emphasize more on closing from experts proving no way it was hit by car - damages
Everything about those jury forms and instructions was confusing... even when she tried to fix it she belched out a word salad that confused everyone more.
It doesn't make sense. If it was a separate DUI charge then fine but it's not. It's a DUI with injury/death. So after they declared her not guilty of leaving the scene of an accident, then how tf did they come to the conclusion that she drove drunk and caused injury or death? Makes no sense
@@amandamosteller1371 I am not claiming it makes sense! I think he wasn’t hit by a car which automatically makes her not guilty on all 3! But I think some jurors were eager to show accountability for his death in some form and this is what they came up with.
@@CharlieLynne-eu9dz she should've thought of that before declaring a mistrial. Since the trial ended there, the jurors are no longer serving as jurors for that exact trial, so they're free to speak on whatever the hell they want to. Sucks to be corrupted suck! 😜
What I am so upset about is the fact that Paul Okeefe befriended those who are the very ones responsible for John’s tragic death !! My opinion ! I do not care whether intentional or unintentional they did it ! Yet he believes this woman who maybe got angry like every other woman at some point in her relationship decided you know what I’m going to murder him tonight ! This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard . The woman is a professional never been in trouble a day in her life ! The defense shows photos of Colin Albert’s bruised knuckles that he supposedly got from falling as if anyone puts their hands out that way to break a fall ! Paul said in his interview Colin Albert’s young life is ruined ! 11:05 defended Trooper PROCTOR ! He defended the way the police handled evidence at the crime scene stating it was a BLIZZARD 🥶 well guess what Duty Ron a retired NYC detective and his counterpart a crime scene investigator said we live in the Midwest you live in Maine for goodness sakes if that’s how you handle a crime scene you shouldn’t be at one! He knows that the only true experts in the entire entire trial that were witnesses worked for the FBI and said that they got their information from the defense. No, they didn’t don’t understand it. I will never understand it. My heart aches for them, but why why are you defending these corrupt disgusting vile humans, I watched how they attacked turtle boy in broad daylight in front of people they’re being charged for it. He knows these people are under investigation yet he continually defends them. I pray that God ends this and frees karen Read and I pray that God brings to light into justice the people responsible for John O’Keefe’s horrific death🙏🏻
Judge should’ve asked the jury if they had reached at least a partial verdict before declaring a mistrial. I thought that at the time but I thought it was unlikely based on the jury’s note.
I prefer to listen to someone who is able to be objective and honestly call balls and stripes regardless if they have a personal opinion. Otherwise, what's the point in educating your viewers or people getting a genuine understanding of how our laws and courts function! Don't be sorry for being honest! Thank you for all the work you put into these videos. I appreciate every minute!!
Totally agree - Peter is one of the few LawTubers I feel I can come to for a truly objective take, even if it doesn’t please the audience. I want to understand, not be pandered to 😅
If juror a, b or c, had a question about whether they could vote not guilty on count 1 and 3 and deadlock on count 2, why didn’t they ask the judge about that?
The judge has consistently dropped the ball trying to make this as favorable for the DA is absolutely possible, and as far as she can, in any stretch of the imagination against the defense. It’s been very blatant.
These jury instructions were always going to be a point of contention for the defense. If found the 2 are unanimous. Then double jeopardy should absolutely be a thing.
The jury all said the day Brian Albert came to court w the okeefes they felt he was intinidating them. The okeefes are the one's who did that for one reason n we were all right. Ridiculous those 3 came that day!!
I can't find any rational excuse for any juror to be split on count 2 - that she definitely didn't kill him on purpose, but she might have hit him unintentionally. Yet they all agreed she was NG of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death or serious injury? To find her guilty of anything, you'd totally have to disregard everyyhing u said, the 2 scientific experts at the end, the marks on John's arm, etc. I'm from MA so I have a pretty good idea of how many people around here are just dumb, but it sounds like some of the jurors put their emotions in front of logic.
They probably thought they were gonna be sent back to keep deliberating..everytime they asked a question they were sent back. They never had a chance to complete the form
OMG are you out of your mind? Were you watching?? Good god unwash your brain..defense wanted it bad..they hugged after she called it and then went outside to gloat. You colon inhabitants can’t make up your mind.
@@LEABEE2329Auntie Bev should get slapped with some consequences for her little trial temper tantrums imo. Hope the feds can deliver on that. Would love to see this entire corrupt PD get the feds so far up their collective buttholes that it makes a colonoscopy look like a temperature reading.
Hearing should be held to determine how the jury voted on each count at the time of deliberations. The form was confusing as well as the instructions for the jury. IMO The court/judge was incompetent in not polling the jury in courtroom to eliminate any questions. The trial was already a mess!!
It’s not only conspiracy it’s Corruption..something is wrong somewhere.. I didn’t like the Judge she was Extremely Annoying and Arrogant and also she had very negative energy The other thing I liked to point out is that how physical appearance resembled Jennifer McCabe and her sister as they are blood relatives so in all fairness everything in Court seemed off with her attitude towards defendants team Shame
On rewatch again over here. So one thing I do remember, after the jury was brought back in , the judge read the note and in the same breath said…. I’m not going to you I’m declaring a miss trial and hit her gavel… so I’m not sure the defense could object to anything… not sure how that would have worked
she declared the mistrial so fast after reading the note, she never asked the lawyers if they wanted the jury polled and the lawyers were not given the opportunity to do so
The judge talked to all the jury privately after everyone else left. The reason for A and B may be that the judge did pole the jury and already knows the answer to the question therefore and just go ahead and move if so asked by the defense..
To me, the question is, did they prove he was hit by a car? Each count required that the jury unanimously agrees he was hit by a car. If prosecution didn't prove that then, it's NOT GUILTY on all three charges!
@@PEBBLEZ21Jennifer, WE KNOW nothing was proven to you because you didn't WANT it to be proven because that would mean more scrutiny to your ilk. But the facts don't really care about your feelings, so why don't you go cry to someone who actually gaf about your feelings or something.
The professionals testified. His injuries were more likely from getting hit on the back of the head. .. and dog bites.. Why get rid of the dog, huh? Even if she did hit him, even if, they flubbed up the evidence. Were all friends and should have not been on this case. Threw phones away... reasonable doubt. They did a piss poor job and just thought she'd take a plea deal.
I'm an old, retired criminal defense attorney/ prosecutor. JD, SJD, PhD.
It raised flags with me when Cannone didn't poll the Jury on each count, NOR did she allow the Parties to SEE the notes, etc sent from the Jury.
But THEN chose to speak to the Jurors privately afterward? ALL of that is HIGHLY unusual. I can't help but wonder if Cannone KNEW they were unanimous on those 2 counts, but suppressed it, illegally "ordering" not to speak about it. Or conveying that impression.
PRIOR TO Jury Deliberations, there was a last-minute removal of a Juror. Or were there 2? ANYWAY. She had the Clerk pull numbers out of a bucket to make it final who would be deliberating.
BUT. Judge and Clerk DENIED the Defense's request to check the bucket and numbers for accuracy. Interestingly, Jurors THOUGHT to be Read supporters were removed, and Jurors THOUGHT to be prosecution supporters added.
AND. The Bailiffs in this trial were STATE POLICE, not County Sheriff's Deputies, as I've witnessed in EVERY local- court trial I've ever seen. MORESO since the MSP was the agency getting ripped to pieces in the trial. VERY ODD.
ON TOP OF the mountain of other garbage and insanity of this trial, it EXPONENTIALLY EXPANDS suspicion that this entire Matter -- with the increased likelihood of Judicial Misconduct - blows the doors off.
Thanks! For your input.
🎯👏👏👏
Fantastic comment, thank you. Liked!
Excellent opinion.
Can anything happen to Cannone for this obvious decision?
Don't forget also...
She states its random which alternates will be dismissed when names are pulled from bucket BUT picked the foreperson BEFOREHAND. How did she know whether that juror would be randomly selected and removed or not...
So obviously the forepersobs number couldn't be in there.
Also 3 jurors were dismissed. All thought to be KR support.
2 were alternates removed and 1 was questioned and removed before the selecting
Judge was pathetic at many levels throughout this trial 😡😡😡
I completely agree!!!!
But what would the judge have to do with hung jury. The defense called for it no prosecution
DEI law student 😂😂🎉
@@jfk32975her crappy instructions
@@jfk32975 not clarifying the jury instructions for starters.
The FBI needs to take a closer look at Auntie Bev, as well.
First, SOMEBODY needs to take a REALLY close looks at the FBI 😳
@@louise2257 True that! Lol
Get over yourself PLEASE…this is the conspiracy of the century and no one spilled? BULLCRAP. It’s simple she’s guilty and a liar.
Shes a monster.. this sucks now.. But I swear I thought bev wouldn't poll the jury and also told them to Take their time, Meaning to me anyway, that the prosecutor didn't do their job. Doesn't anyone else???? And now they can't talk to anyone.. 'you can but I strongly suggest you dont" it was "Her decision, her court, her blah blah blah " she's a monster!!!.
@@adriennem7927 and you’re brainwashed, what you said is bull. She’s doing her job..she’s in on it too huh? You guys are so far up that murderers behind I swear but yet these slimy attorneys write this outrageous motion and you find excuses? Get out Karen’s colon. 24 mph in reverse 60 feet and I HATE YOU VM right after? She did it!! She admitted it.
This trial was a shit show from the beginning. I am not surprised by this at all. Complete judicial failure. Pathetic!
@Camiken65 The only thing is, is that the verdict should have been NOT GUILTY on ALL counts.
Jury was never instructed that they could hang on one charge and decide others. So this is a failure of the court.
The lawyers could have explained in closing also.
@@hopefulhuman not their job to explain jury instructions. They CAN include reference and details about them but that’s the courts job.
Omg yes, "I'm doing it my way, it's my court, and I'm the boss of everyone here" 😠😡
Ain't bev was not going to even let AJ fix that bcuz of the confusion. Then she made it harder fo4 them. Her doing. "ITS MY COURT, ALL ABOUT ME" She's a monster.
@hopefulhuman nope bcuz ain't bev, if you w watched... she was in charge. She turned it all her way, to confuse them.
The whole crooked thing was crooked, from cops to judges, to governor.
Don't forget the DA
@@al1383 yeah, that chain-smoking fool, needs a car wash
There was a crooked man, and he walked a crooked mile,
He found a crooked sixpence against a crooked stile;
He bought a crooked cat which caught a crooked mouse,
And they all lived together in a little crooked house.
@@RobotCrafter1 I hereby challenge any 5 McAlberts in the ring, all at once. No rules.
Welcome to Massachusetts 🙃
The Judge was, inadequate...
Extremely biased, if not corrupt!!
That's the polite way to put it...
I love how Read’s attorneys are reminding everyone why we have our Constitutional rights and why these rights matter
One juror’s report demands investigation at a minimum
Good!
From who? Bev is hiding behind MA law so it will be tough to fight but hopefully higher ups are still watching (*cough* DOJ/FBI)
It’s a load of crap but the fact they said the other two were jurors is just part of their slime. If anyone is corrupt it’s these attorneys and narcissist Karen who is now believing her own lies.
In this bumbling/corrupt "commonwealth"? Awww, you're so cute.
you would imagine that more have come forward by now, or will be coming forward shortly. This ain't going away.
Since I saw it so much in live chat… once dismissed the jurors ARE ALLOWED to discuss the case. They can talk about the case on the phone. They can chat with coworkers. They CAN discuss on a zoom. These jurors came forward AFTER DISMISSAL.
… some judges speak with juror panel as a whole after a case is dismissed, which is ethical, and not uncommon.
@@cocochanel1399yes, and the judge stated that she was going to meet with the jury immediately after court was dismissed. The question is did the jury give Judge Cannone this information at that time?
Somewhat amplifying your point, Juror deliberations are NOT secret. The rule against talking outside of deliberations before the jurors are dismissed is NOT to maintain secrecy. It is to prevent jurors' thinking from being contaminated in any way. Once they're dismissed, they need not talk, but can, talk about their actions and thinking as much as they want.
People are really saying the jurors can’t speak? Man, some people are really confident despite lacking basic knowledge
When Bev talked to the jurors she made it SEEM like the jurors were still very limited about what they were allowed to talk about.
That’s why the juror who contacted the defense said they were only going to alert the attys about the results, not any content, of deliberations.
IOW she mislead them hoping she could sweep her major f up under the carpet.
See. This is why the defense was complaining about the verdict slips. They weren’t given the opportunity to say not guilty on some and hang on others.
AND Bev didn't allow the defense and the Prosecution to review the new verdict form after she made the changes.
Not true…they could ask as many questions as they needed..THE WHOLE FORM WAS BLANK!!
Judge failure!!!!
go back and look at verdict watch. Lally said keep deliberating and defense wanted to mistrial. Don’t start with judge failure. Defense should have spoken up. They ran their lying butts the whole trial!! No failure and this is another slimy attempt by defense to get a guilty client off..she’s a murderer!
Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in
Best comment!
I hear a friends quote there 😆
Right!!!!
I was at the courthouse everyday, not w the KR supporters, just walking around the area because it's near my gym. I met my son today in S. Boston and there were KR supporters across the SBPD where Proctor was re-homed and I'm back!!!
Thank god. I was getting bored!
The judge dropped a lot of balls. She was horrible!!!
No….HORRIBLE, in capital letters.
She meant for the jury verdict slips and and she made the instructions confusing. Lally confused them by lying and rambling on and wasting time.
Incompetent and bias!
I hope more Jurors speak out.
Canone's fault for offering such a confusing jury slip.
For so many reasons
It’s a standard form in that state..did you not listen? They getting out of Karen’s behind.
According to Yannetti, there are other kinds of forms also. Canoni is incompetent.
The Judge did complain to the defense that she was “tired”. In open court. So unprofessional!
@@JK-yf2vl yes! I found that so unprofessional! We’re all tired, yet do our jobs! She seems like she goes home and hits the Pinot noir, no shame in that, but do your job ma’am!
Why? People can’t be tired..maybe go back and listen why she was tired..everything to you Karen lovers is unprofessional except for the murderer.
@@PEBBLEZ21no, we all beleive the Albert's and McCabes are unprofessional too.
Ofcourse she was tired saying so is just stating the obvious it isn't unprofessional it's just being human .
@@PEBBLEZ21I love how every comment of yours is acting like we're all just blind fans of KR's when in reality we found the very obvious cover-up to be pretty blatant and everyone on the prosecution seemed to be VERY bad at their jobs... but nah, we're all just huge fans of this random lady from MA. It's got nothing to do with what was presented in court/how the prosecution was laughably incompetent... nah.
BeV needs to step down
This judge was a disgrace much like Proctor! Her disrespect, obvious disdain for the defense, stopping court abruptly for no good reason, not polling the jury, screwing up the form they were to use....she should be disbarred. Proctor shouldnot be the only one hung out to dry
SMH…brainwashed. Sad day in the US when a murderer has a fan club/cult!
In from CO; I share some of your feelings. I can’t cite exact rules for allowing Judge’s discretion, but something smells like month-old, rotten, fish, IMO. Love this chat! Always goes in HARD, & piques interest- 👍🏽⚖️💪🏽
@@PEBBLEZ21Where hv you been past 50 years? Nothing new in your opinion re small/lg communities “taking sides…” Come on. You must be a nearby community resident, or hv knowledge WE didn’t hear/see. Be better-do better. Character assassinations just not 🆒, in chats, imo! Mine. Doesn’t nd to be YOURS; can we agree to disagree? Unless… and then, perhaps you SHOULD involve yourself in this case: formally. This is a tough-as-nails chat. Throwing around allegations/maligning othr opinions (!), without citations, feels dangerous… Not personally/physically, of course; but expect pushback! I’m glad you’re involved & feel passionate-but at end of day, your commentary isn’t providing chat w/ anything tangible to consider. Think on it. Critical thinking requires facts, & knowing facts, requires learned study (Google isn’t studying); people nd to KNOW positions are steeped in shareable facts-IMO.
Okay: I’m out for now- ✌🏽⚖️🧨📚
Judge Bev should spend time with stinky Proctor
@@PEBBLEZ21did you watch the trial go drink the kool-aid from the cw
Judge just wanted her guilty!! FIRE THAT JUDGE!!!!!! What a waste!!!!! 🤬🤬🤬🤬
Absolutely
AGREE She was HORRIBLE and RUDE! FIRE her and Proctor !!!!
So crooked from the get go! 😮
She was elected, so she can only be recalled by the voters.
@@-Monad-I think she was appointed by the elected DA? Not sure tho.
1) the judge was extremely incompetent for this trial.
2) she did not make sure the the papers made sense for guilty not guilty. The defense argued with her about this…
3) this whole case should be dropped against Karen. Prosecutor did NOT prove guilt. Most of the witnesses for prosecution were liars and trying to save their behinds by getting rid of phones, so called butt dials, selling the house, redoing basement, getting rid of dog…there was no proper investigation at all on any of the police officers and families such as the Alberts and McCabes and others.
That sums it up perfectly 👏
the judge made the papers confusion on purpose. She was trying to trick the jury into voting guilty
Nope, you are the incompetent one
@@gso4469- Simp much? Damn.
@@gso4469ha now we get to laugh at you idiots
Holy smokes! Corrupt right through the verdict!
Wow as far as I see corruption all the way to the Judge If she knew this and didn’t tell the attorneys
… is polling the jury is a lost art? They were confused for sure! The instructions took awhile to nail down and still were, obviously, unclear. Wow. This is wild
Those instructions were way too verbose and very confusing!
In MA, everything is a lost art...
@@cocochanel1399 I don't understand. The jury form should have been completed ? Was it? If the form was not completed why The judge didn't ask for it to be/clarify - if the jury was hung on all counts. ? No one saught that ? Didn't require a poll of nos of guilty vs not guilty, just confirming the individual countss were considered and not agreed. Usually the judge asks the foreperson plus she rushed miss trial and excused the jury. Typical of her unprofessional conduct.
@@caroline-brisbane8577I feel like they didn't want to touch the verdict form at all until they decided unanimously on everything and I guess none of their notes indicated that they were hung up on any particular count. Regardless, the format of the verdict slip is confusing. Each charge should have its own section or page with clear G/NG for each.
@@nora__ no 2 charge for sure, but 1 and 3 were clear, but not ticked not guilty. So why did they say hung and not clarify?
That trial and judge were ridiculous. Waste of taxpayer money! Not guilty. Period.
Karen is guilty period. Manslaughter. Wrongful death suite coming. Witness intimidation also.
OH GOD!! Next time you need the police call Karen Read. Maybe she’ll hit you with her 7000 pound weapon.
10-2 GUILTY!
@@jediknight4316that is absolute not true. The was a unanimous “not guilty” on the 2nd degree murder and hit and run charge. They were stuck on the lesser charges and not polled so no one knows what that outcome was
@@jediknight4316wrong
Judge Bev is finally getting the humbling she richly deserves for how she acted throughout this case.
She did nothing wrong. This motion is ridiculous. These attorneys have pushed way hard in this trial. They wanted the mistrial and they had time to object. Matter of fact THEY wanted it early and LALLY argued to let them continue. To say they couldn’t say anything is a lie…they were smiling and hugging then went outside with a huge gathering. Give it a rest. This is more of their slimy.
@@PEBBLEZ21be quiet, Jennifer. We know how bad you looked on the stand and your repeated comments that blithely ignore all evidence (or lack thereof in the prosecution's case) doesn't help. How about you explain the whole "how soon to die of cold" at 2 am Google search? Oh wait...
Jen in chat. She just can’t keep her mouth shut
the judge should have polled the jury@@PEBBLEZ21
@@PEBBLEZ21did you get your tooth fixed yet Jen?
Aunt Bev( judge) could not get out of the courtroom any faster… to talk to the jurors, I wonder what she said to them. Maybe it’s me, but I never have seen someone so irritated, am I wrong the way I assessed Bev? She was not happy. I’m glad I’m a surgeon
Her last big case the Chesna case(LE was killed) ended in a mistrial not long ago too! They ended up retrying the case and got a conviction.
she looked more pissed then the CW i saw that while she’s reading mistrial
Having been a Vet Tech for several years, and being bitten and scratched (by the way), I know wounds from a dog. Those wounds were from a dog.
This is reason I’ve always said that if a jury can’t reach a guilty verdict even if it’s not not guilty the person should not be tried again.
100%. If there's a jury of peers who can't all agree there is reasonable doubt.
I absolutely agree! It doesn’t matter what the reason is, if the jury can’t agree then it’s out. When people say “well the attorneys will be better equipped to moved forward and prove their case the 2nd time around”, nope, they had the first chance and that should’ve been good enough.
Exactly. That alone proves they have reasonable doubt…
I was thinking the same thing. But 1 person could mess it up. Maybe if you get 10 jurors guilty/not guilty
This. Prosecution shouldn't get a second bite at the apple. They should get one chance to prove it to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and anything less than twelve for guilty should be an acquittal.
I remain solid on my thoughts the prosecution did not prove their case. She should have been found NOT guilty.
I started explaining this case to a friend. Discussed the divisiveness and some of the testimonies. My friend immediatly started defending the cops and assumed KR was guilty. I thought....YES- this was a great example of how people pick sides with so much conviction. My friends father was a Seattle cop.
Confirmation bias!
Well I guess you gotta hear all the evidence before you can make a decision. When I first started reading about the case, I thought she was guilty too, because what other explanation could there be… little did we know….
SPD sucks. Killing pedestrians and mocking them.
She’s right..my 11 yo granddaughter is smarter than you. She watched and knows that c$&@ is guilty!
To be fair, this case was absolutely unbelievable! I had the same reaction at first too. I don't like TB and his behavior was very off putting to me so I didn't trust his claims, but I checked out more credible sources. I still went into the trial sitting on the fence that maybe she did accidentally hit him. This is really a case where someone needs to see the corruption for themselves.
The judge dropped the ball.
No, she got a touchdown for the prosecution and thought no one saw that she cheated using a different ball to do it!
The judge yeeted that ball deliberately
No, the defense did. They didn’t object. But again, yall are so in love with Jackson and his Weinstein defending used car salesman personality that you want to put everything on literally everyone else except Jackson and Karen Read.
I thought to myself when the judge declared a mistrial that the judge should clarify if each were hung just in case of this scenario.
The judge should've declared on each charge rather than just saying a mistrial all together. Count 1- not guilty
Count 2- hung
Count 3- not guilty
So she's not being retried on all charges but just Count 2 bc the way she ended the trial, the state can retry her on all charges. But that would be double jeopardy. Bev messed up.
Like the Judge in Tennessee did with the David Swift trial. I normally don't think TN gets much right lol but on that trial, they did good.
Yes, on purpose imo..i feel shes corrupt @fabnforgotten6061
@@heatherhapgood6235 I agree
That mistrial declaration went so fast! I was so confused about why she didn't ask the jury anything on the record, she just dismissed the jury. I assume that's not strictly disallowed in the rules but I think the rules should be much clearer in this area, it invites judges to just kinda do whatever they want with a hung jury.
The Jury should have been polled before they left!! I feel like now it’s all just hearsay. Nobody will really know what happened
That's why defense is asking for hearing.
Unfortunately before the same judge asking her to admit she is as corrupt as the cops who blatantly lied and not even well! Good luck with the outcome!
This judge has dropped the ball on so much through out this trial.
She seemed exhausted from day 1
Uh, she RIGGED the ball
@@flynneart1111 100%
The Jury Foreman, judging from his notes to the Court, seemed very intelligent & articulate. Why on earth wouldn't he specify that they were deadlocked on 1 charge but unanimous on other? This is mind boggling if true!
Foreperson was picked by BEV PRIOR to the random draw to dismiss the alternates! She loaded the jury by hand picking one of the 12 unfairly!
3 jurors reaching out unsolicited is pretty impressive
Actually it was 1 juror who reached out directly to defense attorneys, and the other 2 were individuals that had spoken to jurors who then told defense what the juror said. Papa Tragos was very clear on that differentiation. Either way, it is crazy I agree and hopefully KR will be acquitted on charge 1 & 3 !
It’s not 3 jurors. Listen
They explained in the motion it was only one direct juror but two indirect. Either way I agree, even one coming forward.
I retract that. There was ONE juror that reached out and 2 people reaching out about 2 other jurors. Not really that impressive since so so many people are very interested in the outcome of this case.
@@ellebooth9171yes I realize that now. Sorry and you thank you
Her rights were violated regarding the investigation lead by ex trooper proctor that was botched and violated her rights should be thrown out and dismissed
This will go down as the most expensive DUI case defense in history. But if Karen goes down for DUI, then everyone else who drove a vehicle that night should as well.
I’m so confused by this. I didn’t think that OUI/DUI as a separate charge was even on there as an option. They got her blood alcohol level by breach of HIPPA from a 72 hour mental health hold a billion hours after she actually drove to Fairview. None of it makes sense. The jury was confused by the verdict slip with no “not guilty” option, pressured, and intimidated by the glaring McAlberts. (Bad plan by Paul. Backfired)
But if they have Karen for drinking no test was done on day of discovery so it's all not guilty
Exactly
The witness said he was drinking all night then got into car to go to station
@@alicencosgrove5533 she is not charged with simple dui.
This is great for Karen 🎉🎉🎉 bad for judge bev n DA. And the fbi is very involved in this case. Proctors sitting at home where he belongs n the corruption hopefully is held accountable. FKR ✌️ ❤
It's not that great , 9 out of 12 believed she killed him with her car. Doesn't bode well for the retrial. Vehicular manslaughter under the influence still carries 15 years.
Aunt Bev strikes again!!! Omg!!! I am _furious_ about this!😠🤬😤
Same!!! She screwed everyone including herself.
@@RMBRN11absolutely what goes around comes around
Did you see her face when the last two auto wreck experts got up on the stand? She had a furious look, she was twirling her glasses, and looking at them with disgust. Any moron would know that a car does not cause only those injuries? Even if he was suspended in the air sideways, head only toward the car, backwards facing, he still had to come down. What...a dog bit him while he was in the air? He had no spine injuries? Check Waddles Triad principles.
I’m furious Karen isn’t in prison but oh well…
@@RMBRN11no she didn’t..Karen is guilty and will be retried.
The text response recorded by Informant B on David Yanetti's affidavit is crucial to the status of the second charge. The text in question reads: "No one thought she hit him on purpose or even thought she hit him on purpose [sic]." Obviously, the statement is saying the same thing twice, but what if the last two words were omitted and the second part of the statement read: "...or even thought she hit him"?
I maintain that is likely the way the statement was intended to read, given the use of the word "even". That word "even" is used for emphasis and is intended to distinguish the second statement from the first, making a statement about the act itself ("hit him") whereas the original statement was more focused on intent ("on purpose").
If that is true, the second charge should also produce a NOT GUILTY verdict because one of the primary conditions that she struck Officer O'Keefe was not sufficiently proven to the jury. But the verdict form itself and accompanying instructions were so confusing that some jurors were unsure as to what they were voting on. If the jurors were plainly asked, "Do you believe the CW proved that Karen Read struck Officer O'Keefe with her SUV?" If they all were not convinced, she needs to be acquitted of all charges, period.
I wonder if it was meant to say "ever" the second time and was a typo?
@@JulieMiller-of2dl Possibly, but why even say it as two separate statements? Why not just say "No one ever thought she hit him on purpose"? I don't know, hopefully the full jury will be able to clarify their deliberations and decisions.
2nd charge stood, they had problems with 1 and 3
Or you could insert "wanted to", so that it reads "No one thought she hit him on purpose, or even thought she [wanted to] hit him on purpose.". Which would make sense. However, until the jurors are actually asked what happened during their deliberations, this is just speculation.
I speculated the exact same thing “ or even hit him at all “ but yes we will have to wait and see
CORRUPT JUDGE
I totally AGREE!
I am now thinking this is true!
I’ve thought it all along!
Absolutely HORRIBLE and RUDE !!!
Bev did go to the back and talked to the jury after by herself
We will never hear from those jurors again, they KNOW they are in danger if they speak. They can say whatever, but they KNOW to fear those cops.
Exactly & Jen too that is one nasty cold mean person. Her big nasty mouth gets her in lots of trouble & cannot tell the truth. Was so snappy during her testimony.
This Judge definitely dropped the ball. You & your Father are lawyers so this seems simple to you. If I were a a jurist in this case…
1) I would never have been comfortable going back with questions to this Judge about the form. Did not find her approachable.
2) This form was too confusing & conflicting and I don’t believe this Prosecution team proved their case.
3) No amount of being sent back to deliberate longer would have made me change my opinion or my vote.
It’s been drilled into me that to find a guilty verdict it has to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt…
That did not happen. This Prosecution team did not prove it. Period. End of story.
Which is exactly what Karen Reads attorneys said on the front steps of the Court house.
The CW didn’t prove their case!
In their opinion but that isn’t true. Was it a not guilty? Nope!! Proved it to me and apparently some jurors. 24 mph in reverse 60 feet with a I HATE YOU VM right after?? She did it. She snapped and jammed it into reverse..see ya popsicle.
@@PEBBLEZ21 The added problem was that the CW's experts were not qualified to prove their case.
The '60 feet in 24 mph' was based on an error by Trooper Paul. KR was not in possession of the car when that key cycle occurred.
So the CW really did not prove their case.
Also, his injuries were not from getting hit by a car, more likely, a fight. Dog bites.. his watch info, flight of stairs.. way too much doubt. Not guilty.
@@PEBBLEZ21 Hello a 3rd time Pebblez, I asked you about your opinion in my previous reply and this comment has a few answers. So, you believe Trooper Paul's version above the Fed's witnesses "CrashDaddies" testimonies, correct?
Now, we are learning that at least on 2 of the charges including Murder2, there was a "Not Guilty" verdict decided. Isn't it hard to add another "accident" to the case against KR? There is another (much easier to believe) explanation for the key cycle info. By the way, try to go 24mph in reverse for 60 ft. I tried but couldn't.
I can believe the "I Hate You" voice messages were because she was drunk and angry, not because she had just killed him. Is "popsicle" a local insult? Thanks
I’m so disgusted by this Judge…why didn’t she poll the jury on each count! This entire trial is a disgrace on so many levels.
Peter, so many times during the Karen Read trial I felt that the judge showed absolute bias towards the prosecution! Now with the information that has come to light that the jurors unanimously voted not guilty for counts one and three, I absolutely believe that the judge knew this information and that's why she did not allow the jurors to be polled or questioned or the notes to be read by either party! Then to top it off the judge questions the jurors privately! I have never heard of this happening in any trial! It is unbelievable what is happening in our country with our legal system! Judges are off the reservation and doing as they please without following the law! This is outrageous! I pray that a full investigation is done and that if they find that the judge in fact withheld this information she should be removed from the bench immediately! God help us all!!
@@citygirl729 total supporter of KR, however......
Its actually normal for judges to speak with the jurors after a trial, just to thank them.
And not one juror has claimed bev knew
Yes I agree that judges always speak to the jurors afterwards but it's usually not done in total secrecy without the attorneys present. I really wish that the jury forman would have asked about what to do in regards to charge 1 and charge 3 since they were not sure about what to do. If they in fact came to a unanimous verdict in each of those charges it just seems really unfair to have to try her again on those charges instead of just charge 2 for manslaughter.
The Karen Read trial not only ended in a Mistrial. The Karen Read trial also ended in a MisJudged!!
Baloney…you’re brainwashed..
Nice comment. Imo. ⚖️
@@PEBBLEZ21How so? Otherwise, your comment is merely YOUR opinion, which you’re obviously entitled to, but “brainwashed” implies that you are in fact, in possession of information we DO NOT hv. Feelings are feelings. Facts are cited… in any/every area of expertise, business, academia. Check b4 wreck, please. Or, just clearly state your comment is YOUR opinion: solely. ⚠️✌🏽
A great opportunity to take a step back and review what a standard jury form should look like, and what the standard instructions to a jury should be, so that there isn’t a repeat of this sort of problem.
👏👏👏👏🤯
YES! Poor layout of complex information really peeves me and if I had been on that jury I probably would have drawn up a better version and told the judge to use my version next time! (That probably would have gone poorly but it's like nails on a chalkboard for me!)
No matter where you stand, this is a bad look for the judge. Really, really bad. This will follow her forever.
Maybe she’s going to write a best-seller book. Shades of Murdaugh in Mass.
I’m thinking early retirement for the judge
This trial is absolutely crazy.
She won't because she's corrupt. She should have asked this and given the defense a chance before dismissal of the jury plus not using NG option under every charge.
The judge SHOULD have polled the jury to ask if they were hung on ALL charges OR, if NOT, which SPECIFIC charge(s) they were hung on!! IF she had ASKED them that, they could have been INSTRUCTED at that time to be sure to check the verdict(s) they AGREED on!! This judge should have NO CHOICE but to hold a hearing with all 12 of these jurors to determine if they unanimously agreed that Karen was “not guilty” on 2 of the charges, as Karen’s CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to NOT be subject to “double jeopardy” would be VIOLATED if what her defense counsel is saying is true and she’s faced with being tried again on those SAME charges!!
I think she truly just wanted it to end so it can become another judges issue someday
@@laure26with all her huffing and puffing and sad, tired, bored and irritated exhales, she wanted it over before it even began!
@@laure26Except for the fact that the SAME judge normally presides over the retrial!!
Can’t in that state..are you not listening or maybe get out of Karen’s behind.
@PEBBLEZ21 maybe YOU need to stop living in the state PD's/prosecution's behind. You clearly are prone to ignoring when they don't provide any substantial evidence to their claims... so how does that police boot taste?
I love that they are quoting John Adams back to Lally et al. 😂
I think Judge Bev quoted John Adams too. Either on their first day, or the day of closings, I don't remember
Yeah I noticed that too! Very Massachusetts to quote John Adams
I was on a jury trial where we had 8 counts to consider and each was clearly treated as seperate. 5 of the counts we could find either at the felony or misdemeanor levels. We went through each and turned in our decision for each count. I can see how this form would be really confusing.
It is kind of scary that the court does not or did not in this case clarify and find her not guilty of the charges that were unanimous. Shady!
Lawyers are witnesses to judge’s failure to share note with lawyer.
I remember that last note and thought it was odd she didn't share it with the lawyers and ask their opinions like all the other notes. So odd to me.
@@esoteridactyl me too.
I’m extremely frustrated that possible juror IGNORANCE is playing such a roll in the dispensing of justice.
It feels INEXCUSABLE to me, that when the jury came back, that they didn’t tell the judge “We WERE able to agree NG on two charges, but unable to agree on the third, and therefore we are hung.” And if not, the JUDGE should have ASKED them (re: each charge) WITHOUT having to be prodded by ANY attorney before declaring a mistrial. What if they agreed on GUILTY to some charges but didn’t mark it??
This feels like such an injustice… never mind the fact that it is BAFFLING to me that 8 jurors believed she hit him with her car.
😏
The verdict form is to blame here, not the jurors, in my lay opinion.
@@GH-oi2jf agree, verdict form was confusing because the top option was Not Guilty on 2nd degree and ALL lesser charges, so they technically couldn't select that option if they were deadlocked on some of the lesser charges. There should have been a guilty/not guilty option by each count to make it clear.
Because all the utube scammers wouldnt make money.
Tik tok.
Wt f up
It's on the judge, not the jury. And a little bit of blame goes to the defense attorneys for not asking
Ignorant jury. Not well educated in basic physics. He wasn't struck at all by her car.
I think the judge would have shut them down if they would have asked.
I think they should drop the cop frame job but stick to the horrible investigation and bias by law enforcement etc. Emphasize more on closing from experts proving no way it was hit by car - damages
Everything about those jury forms and instructions was confusing... even when she tried to fix it she belched out a word salad that confused everyone more.
I can’t understand how even 8 of them considered she was Guilty of any of the charges! WTF were they thinking?
Honestly? I think they felt compelled to find someone accountable for a dead cop and that was the compromise for some of them. Simple as that.
Hey if it makes you feel any better, sometimes the earth is flat.
Same. I don't know what happened to O'keef. All I know is Reed's car never hit him
It doesn't make sense. If it was a separate DUI charge then fine but it's not. It's a DUI with injury/death. So after they declared her not guilty of leaving the scene of an accident, then how tf did they come to the conclusion that she drove drunk and caused injury or death? Makes no sense
@@amandamosteller1371 I am not claiming it makes sense! I think he wasn’t hit by a car which automatically makes her not guilty on all 3! But I think some jurors were eager to show accountability for his death in some form and this is what they came up with.
They either tried or Auntie Bev wouldn’t let them. These lawyers wouldn’t let this go!!!
I believe Auntie Bev didn’t allow. She wanted KR to be found guilty no matter.
@@jillruben8924Auntie Bev needs to also get her butt investigated. Her conduct was disgusting.
Bev said at some point layers are not allowed to communicate with jurors.
@@CharlieLynne-eu9dz she should've thought of that before declaring a mistrial. Since the trial ended there, the jurors are no longer serving as jurors for that exact trial, so they're free to speak on whatever the hell they want to. Sucks to be corrupted suck! 😜
What I am so upset about is the fact that Paul Okeefe befriended those who are the very ones responsible for John’s tragic death !! My opinion ! I do not care whether intentional or unintentional they did it ! Yet he believes this woman who maybe got angry like every other woman at some point in her relationship decided you know what I’m going to murder him tonight ! This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard . The woman is a professional never been in trouble a day in her life ! The defense shows photos of Colin Albert’s bruised knuckles that he supposedly got from falling as if anyone puts their hands out that way to break a fall ! Paul said in his interview Colin Albert’s young life is ruined ! 11:05 defended Trooper PROCTOR ! He defended the way the police handled evidence at the crime scene stating it was a BLIZZARD 🥶 well guess what Duty Ron a retired NYC detective and his counterpart a crime scene investigator said we live in the Midwest you live in Maine for goodness sakes if that’s how you handle a crime scene you shouldn’t be at one! He knows that the only true experts in the entire entire trial that were witnesses worked for the FBI and said that they got their information from the defense. No, they didn’t don’t understand it. I will never understand it. My heart aches for them, but why why are you defending these corrupt disgusting vile humans, I watched how they attacked turtle boy in broad daylight in front of people they’re being charged for it. He knows these people are under investigation yet he continually defends them. I pray that God ends this and frees karen Read and I pray that God brings to light into justice the people responsible for John O’Keefe’s horrific death🙏🏻
Judge should’ve asked the jury if they had reached at least a partial verdict before declaring a mistrial. I thought that at the time but I thought it was unlikely based on the jury’s note.
I agree 💯 percent that the Jury needs to come back and be asked each count
I prefer to listen to someone who is able to be objective and honestly call balls and stripes regardless if they have a personal opinion. Otherwise, what's the point in educating your viewers or people getting a genuine understanding of how our laws and courts function! Don't be sorry for being honest! Thank you for all the work you put into these videos. I appreciate every minute!!
Totally agree - Peter is one of the few LawTubers I feel I can come to for a truly objective take, even if it doesn’t please the audience. I want to understand, not be pandered to 😅
Odd.... defense asked for the verdict form to be changed for this exact reason. Judge said no need..... and yet....
I hope they can dismiss at least the 2 they all voted for
After count one being not guilty, the rest were moot!
Proctor suspended without pay. To Proctor's wife: brings new meaning to your "I support my husband" doesn't it?
😂💯
😂😂😂
You’re sharp as a tack! 😂😂😂
He needs flip no other choice he needs a deal
😅
The judge seemed to declare the mistrial and dismiss the jurors as fast as she could!!
If juror a, b or c, had a question about whether they could vote not guilty on count 1 and 3 and deadlock on count 2, why didn’t they ask the judge about that?
judge confused them imo
The judge has consistently dropped the ball trying to make this as favorable for the DA is absolutely possible, and as far as she can, in any stretch of the imagination against the defense. It’s been very blatant.
Is it possible that the judge ensured that the verdict sheet was confusing simply for this reason?
Absolutely just like she didn’t give an option for not guilty and laughed at the attorneys and yelled at Karen
I really like that you call your dad...Dad... On your channel. Shows a wonderful deep respect and love for your dad.
No jury instructions or form should ever be complicated and contradictory.
These jury instructions were always going to be a point of contention for the defense.
If found the 2 are unanimous. Then double jeopardy should absolutely be a thing.
Love having Poppa Lawyer You Know on here! Y’all are great together!
She didn't drop the ball at all, she is corrupt as hell. Every mistake she has made is in favour of the prosecution
Our justice system is wack asf!!
The state did not prove anything
The state should not waste tax money retrying this regardless of what judge does on this motion.
The jury all said the day Brian Albert came to court w the okeefes they felt he was intinidating them. The okeefes are the one's who did that for one reason n we were all right. Ridiculous those 3 came that day!!
AGREED
at the very least the bailiffs should have made them move so they weren't sitting directly in front of the jury
Brian Albert is a big ewwwww
Agree it was ABSOLUTELY INTENTIONAL!!
I agree it's a form of witness intimidation It was even worst it was allowed to take place in a court room .Judge denied Miss Read a fair trial
The jury didn’t know there was a question that needed to be asked, based on judges response probably.
Your father has common sense! Bravo!
After all of her judicial manipulation she should dismiss but she is may find it difficult to dig herself out of the hole she has dug.
When the red solo cups came into play, I made up mind then and there, not guilty
THE JUDGE failed to inform. She purposely acted in conduct unbecoming of ANY member of the Bar / courts
The chain of custody, plus, they found him on the grass, but blood was on top of the snow. So he was moved hello.
I can't find any rational excuse for any juror to be split on count 2 - that she definitely didn't kill him on purpose, but she might have hit him unintentionally. Yet they all agreed she was NG of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death or serious injury?
To find her guilty of anything, you'd totally have to disregard everyyhing u said, the 2 scientific experts at the end, the marks on John's arm, etc. I'm from MA so I have a pretty good idea of how many people around here are just dumb, but it sounds like some of the jurors put their emotions in front of logic.
☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻
They probably thought they were gonna be sent back to keep deliberating..everytime they asked a question they were sent back. They never had a chance to complete the form
YES TOTALLY AGREE
“OKAY NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, MISTRIAL GO HOME!!!” Is what I felt.
Definetly, because it didn,t go Aunty Bevs way.
OMG are you out of your mind? Were you watching?? Good god unwash your brain..defense wanted it bad..they hugged after she called it and then went outside to gloat. You colon inhabitants can’t make up your mind.
@@LEABEE2329Auntie Bev should get slapped with some consequences for her little trial temper tantrums imo. Hope the feds can deliver on that. Would love to see this entire corrupt PD get the feds so far up their collective buttholes that it makes a colonoscopy look like a temperature reading.
Each juror should be required to vote guilty or not guilty on each count in writing and sign the form, so this mistrial shit doesn't get fucked up!
Hearing should be held to determine how the jury voted on each count at the time of deliberations. The form was confusing as well as the instructions for the jury. IMO The court/judge was incompetent in not polling the jury in courtroom to eliminate any questions. The trial was already a mess!!
More chaos to add to the theory of conspiracy.
It’s not only conspiracy it’s Corruption..something is wrong somewhere.. I didn’t like the Judge she was Extremely Annoying and Arrogant and also she had very negative energy
The other thing I liked to point out is that how physical appearance resembled Jennifer McCabe and her sister as they are blood relatives so in all fairness everything in Court seemed off with her attitude towards defendants team
Shame
On rewatch again over here. So one thing I do remember, after the jury was brought back in , the judge read the note and in the same breath said…. I’m not going to you I’m declaring a miss trial and hit her gavel… so I’m not sure the defense could object to anything… not sure how that would have worked
she declared the mistrial so fast after reading the note, she never asked the lawyers if they wanted the jury polled and the lawyers were not given the opportunity to do so
She didn't even take a breath,there was no opportunity for anyone to say a thing
The judges brother defended one of the witnesses…Albert’s 20 years ago. Killed a man in car accident.
Corruption at the highest levels
The judge talked to all the jury privately after everyone else left. The reason for A and B may be that the judge did pole the jury and already knows the answer to the question therefore and just go ahead and move if so asked by the defense..
Did the jury not listen to the defence experts?
4 of them understood the assignment
To me, the question is, did they prove he was hit by a car? Each count required that the jury unanimously agrees he was hit by a car. If prosecution didn't prove that then, it's NOT GUILTY on all three charges!
Proved it to me and I know your head is gonna blow but apparently they proved it to some jurors..uhhhh, because HE WAS!!!
@@PEBBLEZ21it wasn’t proved. Sorry.
@@PEBBLEZ21Jennifer, WE KNOW nothing was proven to you because you didn't WANT it to be proven because that would mean more scrutiny to your ilk. But the facts don't really care about your feelings, so why don't you go cry to someone who actually gaf about your feelings or something.
The professionals testified. His injuries were more likely from getting hit on the back of the head. .. and dog bites.. Why get rid of the dog, huh? Even if she did hit him, even if, they flubbed up the evidence. Were all friends and should have not been on this case. Threw phones away... reasonable doubt. They did a piss poor job and just thought she'd take a plea deal.
One of the lesser includeds didnt require that she hit anyone