- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Karen Read murder trial - Not guilty on main - guilty of OUI(DUI) only
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:06 am to SCLibertarian
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:06 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
How can 9 people on the jury vote guilty for the lesser included offense of manslaughter? That's absolutely insane given the evidence presented.
IMO the ARCCA experts sealed the case for me. They verified what i was already thinking that the injuries and vehicle damage did not fit with a vehicle strike.
I think there are people that don't understand the ARCCA experts testimony and they can disregard it because of that. Similar to how the cellbrite experts testimony was over my head.
0
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:35 am to AlxTgr
If it was unanimous on 2 of the 3, can she be retried on those 2?
Posted on 7/23/24 at 8:36 am to Townedrunkard
quote:
What makes you think they framed her
Have you looked at the autopsy? He had dog bites on his arms and his face had been pummeled.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:10 am to jorconalx
quote:Seems it's up to judge Bev. I do not know who screwed up more, her or the defense team. Either she should have inquired about the possibility of a unanimous vote on any of the charges, or one of the lawyers should have demanded a poll of the jury before she declared a mistrial. As it stands, the defense motion is based on hearsay. They used affidavits of themselves
If it was unanimous on 2 of the 3, can she be retried on those 2?
I do not know if there is a way to get testimony directly from one of the jurors. I suspect Auntie Bev will be hostile to such a request.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:25 am to winkchance
Is there a link to the autopsy? I want to see where they say this
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:26 am to AlxTgr
quote:
twoseven prods How do you vote guilty on manslaughter but not guilty on leaving the scene?
^ From the comments and it's a solid question.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 9:37 am to idlewatcher
quote:Which charge was it? If it was the lesser included of involuntary manslaughter, then the jury could believe she killed him, but didn't realize it. Leaving the scene requires knowledge.
twoseven prods How do you vote guilty on manslaughter but not guilty on leaving the scene?
^ From the comments and it's a solid question.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 7:48 am to AlxTgr
Hearing on defense motions to dismiss is today. I think it is around 1pm.
Any chance the state comes in and says they will throw out counts 1 & 3 and move forward with only count 2?
I don't know how the state will be able to present a case in the next trail. Every detective involved in the investigation is under an internal investigation. No way the state can call Trooper Paul again to do the accident reconstruction testimony. If they don't have anyone to testify to how the pedestrian strike happened they don't have a case.
Any chance the state comes in and says they will throw out counts 1 & 3 and move forward with only count 2?
I don't know how the state will be able to present a case in the next trail. Every detective involved in the investigation is under an internal investigation. No way the state can call Trooper Paul again to do the accident reconstruction testimony. If they don't have anyone to testify to how the pedestrian strike happened they don't have a case.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:11 am to civiltiger07
This is not going to be a popular opinion but I can't believe so many people in this thread thinks she innocent. She's 100% guilty in my opinion. For the people that think she's innocent. Can you point out a few reasons why you think this and then I'll see if I can refute the claims? I really think there is a lot of misinformation and headline believing going on
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:17 am to Civildawg
I have no idea if she's innocent or not. But the state didn't prove she's guilty.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:20 am to Civildawg
quote:
Can you point out a few reasons why you think this
John O'Keefe's injuries and the damage to Karen Read's Lexus DO NOT match a pedestrian strike. That means KR did not hit JO with her Lexus so she is not guilty of what she is accused of.
When you also listen to the CW reconstruction trooper (i won't call him an expert) very little of his testimony made sense. According to him JO was struck on the arm by the Lexus and was then projected 30ft.
Why are 100% sure she is guilty?
ETA: this is a very fair statement. I do go a step further and say I believe she is innocent.
quote:
I have no idea if she's innocent or not. But the state didn't prove she's guilty.
This post was edited on 8/9/24 at 8:24 am
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:24 am to Civildawg
quote:I honestly don't understand how anyone can think this.
She's 100% guilty in my opinion.
quote:There's really nothing to suggest she did it at all. One of the biggest things is the tail light and all the issues re: the damage to it and the timing of it.
Can you point out a few reasons why you think this and then I'll see if I can refute the claims?
quote:I think you've been hoodwinked.
I really think there is a lot of misinformation and headline believing going on
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:26 am to Civildawg
quote:
This is not going to be a popular opinion but I can't believe so many people in this thread thinks she innocent. She's 100% guilty in my opinion. For the people that think she's innocent. Can you point out a few reasons why you think this and then I'll see if I can refute the claims? I really think there is a lot of misinformation and headline believing going on
You have to prove that she is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And there is a TON of reasonable doubt imo.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:26 am to civiltiger07
That is not what the prosecutions experts are saying. They are saying it matches the injuries. The only one not is the defenses "expert" who hasn't been a medical examiner in over a decade that sought out the defense team to try to get on the stand. People say he had dog bite wounds but that is 100% false. The puncture wounds were already said by the ambulance people that those were wounds trying to revive him. The broken ribs were from cpr which happens all the time
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:31 am to Civildawg
quote:
That is not what the prosecutions experts are saying.
Who are the prosecutions experts?
quote:
They are saying it matches the injuries.
So how did JO get the scratches on his arm, blunt force trauma to the back of his head and cuts on his face from the pedestrian strike?
quote:
The puncture wounds were already said by the ambulance people that those were wounds trying to revive him.
what in the actual frick? puncture wounds from trying to revive? on one arm?
quote:
People say he had dog bite wounds but that is 100% false.
Why are you so confident in saying this?
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:34 am to civiltiger07
Dog bites occur when puncture wounds are on the top and bottom. He only had wounds on the top. You know dogs have teeth on the bottom too? The puncture wounds were from needles from the ems
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:37 am to Civildawg
quote:
The puncture wounds were from needles from the ems
ok you are trolling right?
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:39 am to civiltiger07
No are you? The defense medical examiner didn't even look at the body! She only had pictures
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:41 am to Civildawg
So you are 100% sure the scratches on JO arm (all of them) are from ems attempting to stick him with needles?
So if the his arm injuries are from the ems, what part of JO's body made contact with the Lexus?
So if the his arm injuries are from the ems, what part of JO's body made contact with the Lexus?
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:44 am to civiltiger07
I don't have all the answers off the top of my head, I'll research and get back to you but I want you to explain the defense's medical examiner qualifications and why you think they are dog bites when there are no wounds on the underside. That doesn't make sense at all. I mean Karen read herself said to multiple people and I quote " oh my god I think I hit him"
Page 11 of 159
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News