257. Karen Read and the Death of John O'Keefe Part 6
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- After weeks of trial, the prosecution finally wraps up calling witnesses who are part of the conspiracy. We give our final thoughts on the conspiracy, for now, and get ready to move on to the prosecution's actual case that Karen Read struck John with her car.
Jen McCabe never mentioned Karen saying "I hit him" during her grand jury testimony. It took her years to mention this.
But Anthony Flematti, Tim Nuttal and Katie Mclaughlin ALL testified that Karen Read said "I hit him". "I hit Him" "OMG, I hit him" Are they all lying as well?
@@milart12right. I feel like she hit him!!
@@dianasimplifies girl please
@goodiesgumdrops1164 And no one else overhead Karen asking Jen McCabe to Google how long to die. That testimony came from Jen only during this trial.
Brett, thank you for standing up for what you see as the ‘Truth’ of the situation. Thank you too for explaining
the common sense reasoning behind your stance, and combining it with your special brand of humor and sarcasm.
Alice, your laugh is so contagious I can not help but smile when I listen to you.
I know you are also championing the truth of this case. I am very grateful to you both for the hard work and time that went into this analysis.
Prosecutor’s witnesses were extremely helpful for the defense’s case. During the actual trial (that some clearly never listened to) we couldn’t understand what the prosecutor’s game was as he looked like a fool and he continuously ruined the reputations of the witnesses.
It was questioned in trial, and I do think it's believable that Karen DID drive by the Fairview house alone in the morning - PRIOR to calling Jenn McCabe and freaking out.
And THAT's when Karen first spotted the body or a lump in the snow on the lawn.
It would explain Karen questioning herself and/or the possibility of a snowplow hitting him after a night full of snowplowing in a snowstorm.
That would also explain why Karen was the first to spot the body in the snow when driving to the Fairview house with Jenn and Kerri.
But all of that does not eliminate another cause of injury to John.
Also, why would everyone in the house need to know that something bad had happened to John when there is another OUTSIDE entrance leading directly to the basement - out of eye and earshot? People upstairs with music and chatter could have been completely unaware of any other activity going on in or around the house.
We'd know for sure, except the "investigators" allowed the GPS info on her phone to be overwritten lol. Not to mention that "theory" doesn't even work with the CW "facts". Anybody who believes a word the CW says is unbelievably dense.
Does it explain Karen and Kerry getting out of the car and Karen being hysterical, so much so that Kerry told her to calm the f down, but Jen stayed in the car emotionless?
Does it explain Jen calmly ringing 911 to state a guy is dead outside the Albert’s residence? That guy is a friend and you know his name, and how do you know he’s dead if you haven’t left the car?
Does it explain how Jen told the 911 operator she last saw “the guy” when he got out of the car?
Does it explain Jen hanging up from 911 to make a 9 second call to her sister where she whispered “someone’s coming out to help?
Why would that sentence make any sense to someone unaware that a friend is dead on your lawn and the police are on their way? And why would you whisper it?
Add in the fact that this is the same woman who hours earlier searched how long to die in cold and made 15 phone calls, sent 2 texts and 2 screen shots, all of which were deleted, because we all delete our calls as soon as we finish them right?
@@ThisCharminManc I have NEVER seen someone make so much out of so little. And the search "hos long to die in the cold" was NOT performed at 02:27 by Jen McCabe. Ian Whiffen, the Cellebrite employee, completely debunked this. The Karen Read cult is SO silly.
@@ThisCharminManc 🎯 Even the police car video that dark snowy morning shows only one of those three women hanging back a little, and that was Jen. Why? What was her hesitation at that moment?
Had Karen come back to the house too soon to check on John? Did the cover up need more time to make certain that John was dead before he was "discovered?" Why did Kerri have to tell Jen to call 911? Wasn't it obvious?
It almost makes no difference to me what time Jen did the Google search, because at either disputed time, there had to be a reason for that strange search to be made at all.
It's not a "conspiracy" if a cover up benefits the few who were involved. If one goes down, they all go down.
@@milart12 Why would Jen Google that ridiculous search at all? They found John, called for help, so what difference does it make at that point? Unless . . . it's someone who's concerned that he might survive. 🤔
I will once again state that I’m not surprised there was a mistrial. I love Brett and Alice, but their coverage on this case has been outdated/late (I know that’s not on purpose, they both have busy schedules). Regardless, I believe the prosecution did not prove Karen was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on any of the charges. Conspiracy or not, there was so much shady shit going on with the investigation.
Edit: with parts 7 and 8 having come out now, idk if it’s outdated/late or if they just did not watch the trial at all 💀
Agree!!!
Exactly!!!
What do you mean? Brett predicted that Read would be acquitted on Murder 2 but convicted on dui/manslaughter. Read was not convicted on the dui/manslaughter charge but the jury did vote 9-3 to convict on that charge. Why do you say that they did not watch the trial? Maybe it's you who didn't watch the trial?
No one could work full time, manage a family, sleep, and watch this lengthy trial all at the same time. Not enough hours in the day or even weekends. Logic.
The amount of misinformation that people think is soooo important boggles the mind! I find it ironic that if your thoughts don’t match up with what the FKR want to believe, they immediately discredit you instead of being open-minded and trying to get to the truth, they prefer to believe the bs. So glad I have you 2 to keep me sane ❤❤❤❤
I've seen it go both ways from both camps. If you support Karen's guilt, how can you be discredited? Does being open minded mean ignoring common logic and evidence? Or lack thereof?
@@sammanblue4352 Common logic is what is lacking in the FKR movement. Drunk driving fatalities happen ALL the time. There are 37 drunk driving fatalities in the US every day. I have NEVER heard of a 20-person conspiracy between law enforcement and private citizens to kill someone and then frame an innocent person for murder.
Do you believe that these very ordinary suburbanites dragged O Keefe down to the basement, beat him senseless, let him slowly die there for 3 hours, then callously dumped him in the snow to die? This is the vilest, most contemptible accusation I have ever heard and is impossible to believe.
Seems those that are raging to prosecute her are the ones that aren’t open minded and willing to discredit actual evidence based on science and not proctored evidence.
@@Carryonandlaugh Raging is an interesting choice of words. I don't think that it is "raging" to prosecute someone for drunkenly running someone over, killing them.
Open minded is also an interesting choice. Is it open minded to believe an unprecedented conspiracy theory over an all too familiar drunk driving fatality?
I have never heard of a 20+ person conspiracy between a bunch of normal suburbanites and law enforcement, have you? If you know of one, please let me know. Drunk driving fatalities happen ALL the time. There are 37 every day in the US
I don't know what you mean by "actual" evidence v "proctored", unless you are trying to use leaden sarcasm to refer to Michael Proctor.
And I have seen so many silly Karen read cultists refer to "science" that proves that Read is innocent. If you believe that "science" proves Read's innocence, I suggest that you brush up a little bit on your "scientific" knowledge.
@@milart12 you are clearly a science denialist. Your “opinion” is worthless, I will go with the science thanks, I believe in gravity!
Paraphrasing their testimony is completely different than listening to their actual testimony.
Thank you!
What's your point?
@@milart12 You can't hear the tone, context, nervousness & dishonesty in their voices. They sound like they're talking about different people than the ones I watched testify.
The problem I have with your commentary is that you are presenting a view that the defense has to prove anything. They do not. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Karen Read hit him and she did so intentionally.
And don’t forget, it’s not the defense’s job to look for/find the truth, their job is to poke holes in the prosecution’s case. The prosecution’s job is to find and share the truth and present the facts…nothing flashy or exciting 🧐
@@MistyMeanorB The Defense did a good job seeking the truth. Something to be envied by any manipulative prosecutor.
They normally don't, but if your defense is blaming other specific people then you have painted yourself into a corner of needing to provide evidence for it.
Excellent point!
Terrible misinformation. Don’t rely on the prosecutors for true and accurate summaries of this trial.
YES!!!! Another episode! ❤
Thanks Brett and Alice!❤
Brett and Alice your energetic review of this case, with perfect counter arguments, has demonstrated what amazing ‘Prosecutors’ you both are.
Sadly both Alice and Brett are coming across resentful of an astute defense attorney seeking the truth. Should be the other way around.
@@buckstopshere6306 nope
@@buckstopshere6306I would never cheer for Alan Jackson, i am glad he is defending the innocent person here.
@@Ieezeca I am more than happy that Karen has the Defense that she has. This case should have never gone to trial.
Excellent stuff. You guys absolutely see Karen Read for what she is and haven't allowed yourselves to be fooled by her like so many people seem to be.
Loving spicy Alice! It is such an outrage this case. An unnecessary death of a beloved man.
It's unbelievable to me that people have so much time on their hands. Doesn't anyone work anymore? These people spend countless hours each day online vilifying John's friends and family and were outside everyday protesting on Karen's behalf during the trial. John must be looking down from heaven in utter disbelief. These victims are relentlessly attacked by a mob that clearly have no morals or shred of decency. Even if you believe Karen to be innocent, their behavior is inexcusable! Who raised these people?! If they have all of this time on their hands, why don't they go save some dophins or help find missing children. Instead, they spend their relatively short time on earth to protest on a woman's behalf, who clearly hit him with her car and caused his death. Not to sound crass, but you only need an IQ of room temperature to solve this case. I really wish Lally would listen to your podcast and get some tips on how to be more effective next time around.
I believe Karen hit him--perhaps unintentionally--while she was highly intoxicated. She probably had a vague recollection of the incident but wasn't sure if it was real or a dream. There's no conspiracy.
Thank you guys for providing a level headed information. This case needs some common sense.
Its crazy to me how passionate some of these comments are, the mostly likely chain of events seems so obvious
People are passionate because they see police misconduct and a potentially innocent woman looking at 20 years. No proof he was hit by any car. So it's a big deal, these are corrupt Cops if you haven't read the memo. It's real and this could be any of us!
You asked Brett so here's my answer. Why does she think she hit him? They're arguing, she gets out of the car, he's mad and throws the glass at the car in a fit of rage. She hears a thump but doesn't even enter her mind that it could have been him until the next morning when she sees a broken taillight and can't find him. From texts and VM, girl is dramatic AF. Are we to believe that she is so cold hearted that she intentionally ran him over then called and cussed him out multiple times afterwards about sleeping with other girls? You know he's dead, you just hit him with your car at 24 mph, why call him at all? And if it was for an albi, wouldn't you have left kinder messages like hey I'm worried about you? No, she's cussing him out, something you would do if you thought he was alive. I do not think he was killed inside the house, who knows what really happened but I tend to believe. He's drunk, it's cold and slippery, he hits his head and passes out in the snow
@@nicolelarson2541 quite a reasonable theory. I think that's quite likely. The only thing that it's not explained is the abrasions in his arm. They were done while he was still alive according to the doctor. And if it were an animal that just passed by when he was on the ground, why only his arm, not his face.
@@rancchan His face was all busted up!! Most of the injuries are to his head. Which one of a million reasons the CW has this all wrong.
@@lavelleronning4639 you're right, the injuries on his face aren't explained either, by just falling on his back.
I genuinely don't know what to think. I initially thought she hit him unknowingly and everyone thought she did it on purpose so the 'framing' was moving the evidence towards her by police and people in the house. I then thought, due to the complication of the injuries, that he WAS in a fight in the house. I thought it was family- dad, son, uncle, mom- not this whole passel of partygoers that would need to false alibi and lie. The more people involved in a lie, the more likely someone would break or slip and everyone so far has held the line.
I’m really enjoying the common sense commentary. I’ve listened to all your podcasts as a long time follower and trust and respect your views and judgment. Interesting to have another perspective from the point of view of prosecutors and not those who are defence trained.
I do believe she’s guilty although she may have not known the injuries she caused were life threatening even if it was a genuine accident at first, she did choose to leave the scene and then leave him there in the cold for hours. Even when he didn’t come home or respond to her calls she could have gone back to check on him earlier. But she knew should he still be alive then he could tell everyone what happened and would not be good for her. So she left him long enough to die.
So many of her subsequent actions that evening and the next morning point to her knowingly trying to cover her tracks. She knew she hit him, hence why she was throwing the snow plough suggestion out before they’d even “found” him. She was desperate to get to Fairview because she knew where he was and just wanted to get it over and done with. And I think she kept asking is he dead because she was worried if he’d lived to tell the tale!
So many people have fed her the crazy alternative stories I think even she now believes them herself unfortunately. Her past behaviour shows she looks out for number 1.
Explain the wounds on his arm.
Karen Read is absolutely guilty and I appreciate your coverage on this.
Pulcritude beautiful - took Latin in school❤
Karen Read was framed. That was the statement.
Your bias is showing. You are not looking at the ways that there are some serious problems with this case.
Would you have, as a prosecutor brought this case after hearing both sides experts?
Have you ever heard of a conspiracy between the police and civilians to frame an innocent person for murder? Why would you believe this narrative as opposed to a drunk driving fatality, which, sadly happens 37 times EVERY day in the US?
Hitting a bag does not hurt the knuckles. My son in law was a pro boxer. He would train over 8 hours a day hitting the bag. Not once have I seen his knuckles hurt. If they were hurt he could not fight in the rink. After the fights his knuckles looked like colins when they started to heal. Colin totally punched John. Also the cut above johns eyebrow is something I have seen on my son in law’s opponent’s eyes after every fight. Also didn’t john have black eyes? I want to know who hit john with a dumb bell on the back of his head. John had a lot on the Alberts for drug dealings. The Feds need to go and investigate the basement walls, the filled pool. I believe the cement from the basement and the dog are in the pool. I don’t believe they gave the dog away.
So your done with this case??? Do I agree with a HUGE conspiracy? No, do I think the CW proved their casE, ABSOLUTELY NOT! Did you even listen to the defense witnesses (especially the unbiased FBI witnesses?) I’ve always appreciated your post casts, but not this time. It seemed totally biased and one-sided.
Fun fact:Number 1 walk out song for MMA fighters is Its Raining Men 😂
Alice, let me guess, is it the mother-in-law who continues to leave her shoes on?
A drunk angry vwoman hit him and ran
With all due respect, you have to recognize your bias. I do get that Karen comes across a bit off at times, and I don't believe in the conspiracy theory either. However, I don't get why some subjective things don't make sense to you (like "why would she say that if she didn't do it") but, in your opinion, it makes sense that she hit him even when his injuries weren't consistent with being hit by a vehicle. Not even bruising! How is that even logical?
It's called common sense, not bias.
Is that the take, she said she did it so she must have done it 🤯
Martin Tankleff said he killed his parents. The Norfolk 4 said they committed murder. The West Memphis 3 said they killed kids. The Central Park 5 said they attacked a jogger. Charles Erickson confessed to murder after a binge where he woke up and didn’t remember what happened that night. None of them did anything of the sort.
The list of false confessions is endless. How does the words of one emotional & panicked woman who just found her boyfriend dead mean more than all the other evidence that points the other way? Unbelievable.
@ThisCharminManc All Innocence Fraud. Money Makers. Keeping defending known murderer s, you'll be richly rewarded
I've seen this viewpoint in many other posts. I don't believe that there was some great conspiracy to frame Read, nor do I believe that O Keefe was run over by Read. I am not sure that I understand this point of view.
It has to be one or the other-Grand conspiracy or Read drunkenly ran him over. There is an abundance of evidence that Read ran him over and very little evidence of some unprecedented conspiracy. For me, it's an easy call-Read drunkenly ran him over.
It seems that many are hung up on O Keefe's injuries, particularly those on his arm. They also often cite the testimony of the ME and the defense's accident reconstruction experts in support of the argument that the injuries did not arise from a motor vehicle accident.
The medical examiner's testimony doesn't concern me one way or the other. She testified that O Keefe died from blunt force trauma and hypothermia, a fact that was apparent to most observers. She refrained from testifying HOW the injury to his head happened and did not rule out several possibilities. In other words, par for the course, as far as MEs' testimony goes. She described the injuries and cause of death and deferred to other investigators to determine how it happened.
The ARCCA investigators were good. But their testimony was limited to rebutting the prosecution's version of how the accident occurred. The prosecution's expert was poor and did not provide coherent testimony as to precisely how the accident occurred. He did provide good testimony concerning the data from Read's Lexus though, indicating that she backed up at a high rate of speed and appeared to abruptly hit something. The ARCCA experts did NOT testify that the laws physics somehow precluded a finding that Read hit him. I have read many posts to this effect. "I guess that you don't believe in physics" or "OK, science denier" They are putting way too much stock into expert opinion.
The ARCCA experts were retained by the FBI and not the defense, which lends a certain amount of credibility to the testimony. I am still puzzled about the FBI involvement. It is very unusual for the FBI to conduct a parallel investigation of a state crime. It seems like the FBI thought that it was uncovering some rampant corruption in the investigation. It really threw a monkey wrench into everything.
MVAs involving vehicles and pedestrians are messy. This one is particularly unusual. Read was backing up. O Keefe had to be crouching down in order to be hit on the head. The scratches to O Keefe's arm are hard to figure out. But given the OTHER evidence-The Read/O Keefe relationship was fracturing-The fact that Read was dead drunk-Read acting like the guiltiest person on the face of the earth, admitting that she hit O Keefe-debris from Read's Lexus taillight found at the scene- data obtained from Read's Lexus-leads to the ineluctable conclusion that she hit him, causing his death.
@@ThisCharminManc Marty Tankleff DID kill his parents. The Memphis 3 ARE guilty-The Cental park 5 did not rape the jogger but did assault her-Charles Erickson and Ryan Ferguson ARE guilty .You are the naivest person on earth
Why was John saying that Colin was continually throwing beer cans? over his fence? Why?
I think his dad testifies that it actually was his brother, not Colin.
How do you know that John said that? It was ALL made up by Karen Read.
I hope you will read these replies and see the commonalities in the general thinking
This podcast is...
Brilliant
Intriguing
Accomplished
Sensible
Educational and
Dynamic
And biased.
@lavelleronning4639 I'm guessing you didn't read my comment that closely.
Is it ok for Karen Read’s defense to have knowingly used underhanded tactics, to, in this case, incite Karen Read’s base throughout this trial which in turn felt justified in their cruelty to others not in Read’s base?
@@cuddiesandyums You mean like the deceptive inverted sallyport video that Defense presented into the trial? Oh no. Wait. That was the Commonwealth who did that.