- 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 6/10/24 at 7:59 pm to WinnaSez
Posted on 6/10/24 at 7:59 pm to WinnaSez
quote:
It’s all very shady. Something happened in that house and they are framing the GF.
That’s where I’m at as well. Way too much coincidental stuff including the magically non-working security cameras
0
Posted on 6/10/24 at 8:00 pm to notiger1997
quote:
Explain this to me like I’m a child
She drank waaaaay too much Kool-Aid the night before with her friends and when she woke up to watch cartoons the next morning she still had a TON of sugar in her belly.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 4:02 pm to AlxTgr
sounds like the state is about to finish their case.
So far from my understanding (of the state's case) the officer was backed into by the SUV with his back to it and hit on his arm/shoulder. The officer has a massive fracture to the back of his head and cuts above his eye and on the side of his nose.
How in the hell does that happen?!
This stinks to high heaven and something happened in the Albert's house.
Unfortunately since so much evidence was tampered with/poorly handled this case will probably never be solved.
The Accident Reconstructionist the state put on the stand was a joke and the state has in no way proved that Karen's SUV backed into the officer. much less caused his death by backing into him.
So far from my understanding (of the state's case) the officer was backed into by the SUV with his back to it and hit on his arm/shoulder. The officer has a massive fracture to the back of his head and cuts above his eye and on the side of his nose.
How in the hell does that happen?!
This stinks to high heaven and something happened in the Albert's house.
Unfortunately since so much evidence was tampered with/poorly handled this case will probably never be solved.
quote:
She may have been drunk driving and hit him and doesn't remember. But intentionally killing him is a stretch.
The Accident Reconstructionist the state put on the stand was a joke and the state has in no way proved that Karen's SUV backed into the officer. much less caused his death by backing into him.
This post was edited on 6/20/24 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 6/20/24 at 4:03 pm to AlxTgr
Free Karen Read and bury Proctor underneath the frickin prison.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 4:25 pm to civiltiger07
I just can't wait for it to be over because of what may be investigated later, and of course, the Netflix documentary.
Rumour/theory I read somewhere else this week was to the effect that Colin was a drug dealer, and the victim had reported drug activity in the neighborhood. An actual name was provided, but when it came time for this person to sign an affidavit, he disappeared. This is why Karen was waiting to go in-to see if it were actually safe for them at that house.
Rumour/theory I read somewhere else this week was to the effect that Colin was a drug dealer, and the victim had reported drug activity in the neighborhood. An actual name was provided, but when it came time for this person to sign an affidavit, he disappeared. This is why Karen was waiting to go in-to see if it were actually safe for them at that house.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 4:35 pm to AlxTgr
Similar to the movie Copland
Posted on 6/20/24 at 4:48 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
This is why Karen was waiting to go in-to see if it were actually safe for them at that house.
This is my biggest question: If the cop knew he had beef with this guys family, why would he go to that house? Did they pretend they were making amends and lure him there to beat him up and accidentally killed him?
Also its very clear from what we know about the Nephew/son that is maybe a drug dealer that this family is a bunch of bullies that think they can do whatever they want because "the law" is on their side.
This post was edited on 6/20/24 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 6/20/24 at 5:02 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
Possibly not guilty. Would need to consider more evidence.
The whole body of evidence, and all the cracks in it.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 9:08 pm to Bert Macklin FBI
quote:Some certainly believe this.
lure him there to beat him up and accidentally killed him?
Posted on 6/20/24 at 9:24 pm to AlxTgr
The judge mentioned today that they are going to finish the trial. Guess the defense is going to call the snow plow driver, the doc to identify the dog bits and the experts the feds hired. Then put a bow on it and send the jurors off to deliberate.
Ole Lally has to know these two experts are going to blow up the entire case, not like the fuse wasn’t already lit.
Ole Lally has to know these two experts are going to blow up the entire case, not like the fuse wasn’t already lit.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 9:31 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
I just can't wait for it to be over because of what may be investigated later, and of course, the Netflix documentary.
The Netflix documentary will be a must see, but I doubt there will be any further investigations bc it seems that local LEO have circled the wagons around the McCabe’s.
Maybe the feds will uncover something, but they seem inept.
Last I heard, the judge heard testimony from a defense dog bite expert, without the jury present, to determine if the jury should hear the testimony. Is this normal? Shouldn’t the defense be allowed to put forth whatever expert they need to refute the prosecution?
Granted, all of my criminal trial knowledge comes from Law & Order, but this seems odd to me.
Posted on 6/20/24 at 10:31 pm to WinnaSez
quote:
Maybe the feds will uncover something, but they seem inept.
I’m not sure about that. The feds are the ones that procured the two experts that will be testifying in the defenses case. Also they released some docs that contradict the entire grand jury hearing.
quote:
Last I heard, the judge heard testimony from a defense dog bite expert, without the jury present, to determine if the jury should hear the testimony. Is this normal? Shouldn’t the defense be allowed to put forth whatever expert they need to refute the prosecution?
Usually the witnesses are vetted before the trial starts but the three witnesses that were voir dired Tuesday were not part of the original witness list because the defense discovered them after the trial started. So they held the voir dire because the defense motioned to not allow them to testify.
This post was edited on 6/21/24 at 6:45 am
Posted on 6/20/24 at 10:37 pm to civiltiger07
quote:
but the three witnesses that were voir dired Tuesday were not part of the original witness list because the defense discovered them after the trial started.
quote:
The feds are the ones the procured the two experts that will be testifying in the defenses case.
Ah okay. So did the the defense discover the dog bite expert as a result of the Feds investigation? I’m not an attorney, nor did a stay in a Holiday Inn express last night.
This post was edited on 6/20/24 at 10:39 pm
Posted on 6/20/24 at 10:44 pm to WinnaSez
quote:
So did the the defense discover the dog bite expert as a result of the Feds investigation?
No. She knows someone that knows the attorney Jackson and mentioned she might be able to look at the case if they were wanted her too.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 6:45 am to civiltiger07
Looks like Karen's log in to John's wifi contradicts the alleged timeline and may have caught Jennifer McCaaaaaaabe in a lie.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 6:48 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Looks like Karen's log in to John's wifi contradicts the alleged timeline and may have caught Jennifer McCaaaaaaabe in a lie.
absolutely! I'm sure Jenny from the block would say her estimate on the time was just a guess. Also, Lally stated in his opening that Karen was still in front of the Alberts house at 12:45. If any of the jury remembers that it is not good for the state.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 8:28 am to AlxTgr
I have to ask if this prosecutor actually believes his case.
This guy is either an idiot/incompetent or he is going along with some kind of coverup IMO.
This guy is either an idiot/incompetent or he is going along with some kind of coverup IMO.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 8:37 am to civiltiger07
I hope the defense puts on that investigator who posted a series on YouTube clearly showing her taillight wasn’t broken when she arrived home.
Posted on 6/21/24 at 8:38 am to civiltiger07
Prosecutors routinely rely on LEO for evidence in their cases and they are USUALLY reliable and trustworthy. I can see the prosecutor simply trusting the local cops' version of the facts and going to trial, only to see the whole thing unravel in real time.
Its entirely possible that the prosecutor is getting hammered with new info every day...
Its entirely possible that the prosecutor is getting hammered with new info every day...
Posted on 6/21/24 at 8:41 am to nitwit
quote:
I can see the prosecutor simply trusting the local cops' version of the facts and going to trial, only to see the whole thing unravel in real time.
I don’t believe this. There’s no prosecutor out there with an ego so small they can stand to be embarrassed this badly in a trial.
Page 2 of 158
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News