- 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 8/9/24 at 8:45 am to Civildawg
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:45 am to Civildawg
The experts that mattered were the outside ones hired by the feds who were also investigating. Those experts were non biased and said the injuries did not match being hit by a car.
0
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:56 am to Civildawg
What about all of the personal relationships, deleted calls & texts, missing security footage, altered videos, shitty investigating in general? Does none of that put any doubt in your mind? I would ask you what legitimate proof you have that Karen Read murdered him?
You can think that she did it all you want. Proving that she did it beyond reasonable doubt is a whole other discussion, and I don't think the state has done that at all.
You can think that she did it all you want. Proving that she did it beyond reasonable doubt is a whole other discussion, and I don't think the state has done that at all.
This post was edited on 8/9/24 at 9:02 am
Posted on 8/9/24 at 8:57 am to Civildawg
quote:
I want you to explain the defense's medical examiner qualifications
If you actually watched the trail all of her qualifications were laid out at the beginning of her testimony. She has written papers on dog bites.
ResearchGate
quote:
why you think they are dog bites when there are no wounds on the underside.
I did watch a video on YouTube by a Police K9 trainer that explained the reason for only the top teeth puncturing the skin. It comes from an dog that isn't fully trained or failed Police K9 training. They are biting shallow. He specifically pointed to one bit on JO's arm that was from the very front teeth (top and bottom).
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:01 am to Civildawg
quote:
" oh my god I think I hit him"
Ah so the hearsay that magically changed for Did I hit him to I hit him at the grand jury.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:01 am to Civildawg
quote:It truly looks like you have not paid attention to this at all.
Civildawg
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:03 am to civiltiger07
quote:
Ah so the hearsay that magically changed for Did I hit him to I hit him at the grand jury.
Yep. That was all he needed, lock her away for life.
The fact that he used that to "prove" that she is guilty is hilarious.Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:03 am to Civildawg
quote:
The puncture wounds were from needles from the ems
OK everyone. Stop replying to this clown.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:05 am to AlxTgr
quote:
It truly looks like you have not paid attention to this at all.
My take as well. Almost like someone that has just read headlines
I find it a bit funny that dawg posted this earlier
quote:
I really think there is a lot of misinformation and headline believing going on
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:07 am to AlxTgr
the bite that is the closest to JO wrist is the bite I was referring to as being from the very from teeth of a dog.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:08 am to AlxTgr
Maybe it was a really really really bumpy ambulance ride to the hospital while they tried to give him an IV……
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:09 am to Civildawg
quote:
Dog bites occur when puncture wounds are on the top and bottom.
A person that deals with police K9's would be able to explain why this statement is false.
ETA: here is a video from a K9 trainer doing just that
YouTube
This post was edited on 8/9/24 at 9:14 am
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:18 am to civiltiger07
Chloe was re-homed. The floor was ripped out and changed. Colin claims he injured his knuckles bracing for a fall. Zero primates do this. Colin was a drug dealer. John made confirmed complaints about drugs in the area. Johns was basically begged to go to a house he was unfamiliar with.
If he never went in, why the need to tell the group to say this?
Why destroy your sim? Why drive to a military base to throw a phone in a dumpster?
Why show a reversed video to the jury that does not show the tail light in question?
Why were tail light parts found on the second visit after the snow fall?
Why were there no bruises on John's mid-section?
hos long to die in cold?
quote:
“tell them the guy was never in the house”…. “exactly”
If he never went in, why the need to tell the group to say this?
Why destroy your sim? Why drive to a military base to throw a phone in a dumpster?
Why show a reversed video to the jury that does not show the tail light in question?
Why were tail light parts found on the second visit after the snow fall?
Why were there no bruises on John's mid-section?
hos long to die in cold?
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:23 am to civiltiger07
He also said this earlier in the thread
LINK
LINK
LINK
quote:
I'm listening to the prosecutors podcast. They are lawyers that look into true crime cases. They try to tell both sides. They've only done a couple of episodes so far on this case so they have a long way to go until the completion
LINK
quote:
I agree they are pro prosecution. I just looked at their Twitter and they seem upset. They for sure think she did it. One thing they keep saying is that for her to be innocent, the whole town would basically have to be in on the conspiracy and they just don't believe that's possible. They also think the public thinks everything is a conspiracy so they think the public is bias
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:30 am to LSBoosie
I've listened to multiple podcasts not just that one. I agree there are some bad police involved but that doesn't mean everyone in the whole city involved with this case tried to cover for people they barely knew. I guess people will believe what they want but there was absolutely no motive at all for those people to kill him.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:31 am to LSBoosie
Headlight impact at 24mph
Her light cover was damaged when she backed into a vehicle-not human flesh.
Her light cover was damaged when she backed into a vehicle-not human flesh.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:32 am to AlxTgr
Why were tail light parts found on the second visit after the snow fall?
Because snow was covering everything from the blizzard. Once the snow melted they found more evidence
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:33 am to AlxTgr
quote:
If he never went in, why the need to tell the group to say this?
Why destroy your sim? Why drive to a military base to throw a phone in a dumpster?
Why show a reversed video to the jury that does not show the tail light in question?
Why were tail light parts found on the second visit after the snow fall?
Why were there no bruises on John's mid-section?
I love a good rhetorical question
I can add:
If the detectives knew the taillight lens was completely gone (like we saw in court) why did they not continue searching for more material after they found the first piece of taillight? instead it took the detectives about a week to find all of the taillight pieces to reconstruct the taillight lens.
Also I wonder if Dawg knows that the first piece of taillight material was found more than a hour after KR's Lexus was impounded.
KR's Lexus impounded at 4:15pm
taillight lens material found in vicinity of where JO's body was found at 5:30pm
All of Detective Proctors reports state he impounded KR's Lexus at 5:30pm
Proctor did not address this "typo" until he is presented with video that he actually impounded Lexus at 4:15pm
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:36 am to Civildawg
quote:
Because snow was covering everything from the blizzard. Once the snow melted they found more evidence
on Jan 29th at 5:30pm the snow did not begin to melt.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:38 am to Civildawg
quote:
I guess people will believe what they want but there was absolutely no motive at all for those people to kill him.
Is anyone saying that they purposefully killed him? And none of those people are on trial for murder so that's not really the point. You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Karen Read murdered him, and I am asking you for roof how you are 100% certain that happened.
You can't just say that Brian Albert had no motive to kill him therefore Karen Read is 100% guilty of murder. That's not how it works.
Posted on 8/9/24 at 9:44 am to Civildawg
quote:
Why were tail light parts found on the second visit after the snow fall?
Because snow was covering everything from the blizzard. Once the snow melted they found more evidence
Page 12 of 159
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News