- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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 5/8/25 at 8:14 am to AlxTgr
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:14 am to AlxTgr
quote:
just saw a video pointing out how much of this case is based upon things she said
Getting Kerry to admit that Jen helped her put together a timeline before she was interviewed was HUGE.
0
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:22 am to idlewatcher
I see people in the comments of the live stream saying the investigator on the witness stand right now is lying.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:23 am to LSBoosie
Another question for people in this thread, have any of y'all ever been on a jury for a case as long/serious as this? For me, it's very hard to currently separate what all key info the jury is picking up on, as I already know most of what the important info is that will come in. I think about dates or times or facts that I know are important but I wonder if the jurors will even note or remember them. I feel like it would be very easy for me to zone out/miss out on info, especially during boring testimonies like yesterday.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:25 am to LSBoosie
quote:
have any of y'all ever been on a jury for a case as long/serious as this
I've been on two juries and both wrapped up in a week from start of jury selection to delivering a verdict.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:27 am to LSBoosie
No I have not, but I know people tend to remember the beginning and end of of events more than the rest of them.. Which is why the opening and closing statements are important.. And if that's the case, Read's side definitely won the opening arguments.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:37 am to LSBoosie
quote:
Another question for people in this thread, have any of y'all ever been on a jury for a case as long/serious as this?
My first go around at jury duty was a civil trial. A civil trial against big tobacco. Jury selection was 3 weeks. Plaintiffs used their last strike on me as Alt 1.
Trial lasted a little over a year.
I dodged a bullet that day.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:52 am to Rebel
The Commonwealth not calling Michael Proctor is shady as all get out.
Andrea Burkhart made a great point too, Proctor and Bukhenik had decided before going to Karen Read's parents house that she was guilty because they already had a warrant to seize her car. They did that before seeing the car or even talking to Karen. Insane.
Andrea Burkhart made a great point too, Proctor and Bukhenik had decided before going to Karen Read's parents house that she was guilty because they already had a warrant to seize her car. They did that before seeing the car or even talking to Karen. Insane.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:56 am to MFn GIMP
The judge just issued a statement about what the witness is about to say. She said nothing that is about to be discussed in relation to quotes from Karen will not be evidence.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 8:59 am to MFn GIMP
quote:
They did that before seeing the car or even talking to Karen.
Then when they got to her vehicle they didn’t immediately take a photo of the rear taillight.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:01 am to civiltiger07
Then, they flipped the security footage shown in the 1st trial so it didn’t look like Proctor was close to the “broken” tail light when he was fumbling with something. When flipped back, he was fumbling around in the area of the broken tail light.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:04 am to LSUGrrrl
“Did you manipulate the phone in any way?”
Bukhenik: “no”
“Did proctor manipulate the phone in any way?”
bukhenik: “not that I can recall”
Not to nit pick but that Seems like that’s an easy no.
Bukhenik: “no”
“Did proctor manipulate the phone in any way?”
bukhenik: “not that I can recall”
Not to nit pick but that Seems like that’s an easy no.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:04 am to LSUGrrrl
Haven’t followed this case at all but there’s already documentaries on this case on multiple streaming platforms and you’re telling me they’re at trial right now?!
Those documentaries must play a role on the psyches of active jurors there. Everyone forms their own opinion on these true crime cases once they’ve watched the documentary
Those documentaries must play a role on the psyches of active jurors there. Everyone forms their own opinion on these true crime cases once they’ve watched the documentary
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:05 am to Who_Dat_Tiger
Most of those documentaries were made in between the 1st trial and the 2nd.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:06 am to LSUGrrrl
And what trial are we on now?
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:06 am to Who_Dat_Tiger
2nd
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:08 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Then, they flipped the security footage shown in the 1st trial so it didn’t look like Proctor was close to the “broken” tail light when he was fumbling with something. When flipped back, he was fumbling around in the area of the broken tail light.
It's 100% sketchy and is still a massive red flag imo, but is somewhat eased by the dashcam footage that shows them showing up to O'Keefe's house and it looks like the taillight is already broke.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:09 am to LSUGrrrl
Guess I’ll need to watch one of them to get up to speed here
I imagine whatever the trial is in this case is a different matter than the trial that the documentary focused on
I imagine whatever the trial is in this case is a different matter than the trial that the documentary focused on
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:13 am to Who_Dat_Tiger
quote:
I imagine whatever the trial is in this case is a different matter than the trial that the documentary focused on
No. Hung jury in 1st trial. It’s just 5e retrial with pretty much the same witnesses except for the state trooper investigator that was fired after the 1st trial. It’s been interesting to see the slight changes in testimony for each witness between the 2 trials.
The documentary of Karen preparing for the 2nd trial actually made me dislike her as a person somewhat but I just don’t see how she could ever be found guilty of these charges.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:14 am to LSBoosie
quote:
but is somewhat eased by the dashcam footage that shows them showing up to O'Keefe's house and it looks like the taillight is already broke.
Kind of but it could also be covered by snow. On John's ring camera video you can see her brake light still shining red, and not looking broken, when she left John's house that morning.
Posted on 5/8/25 at 9:14 am to LSBoosie
quote:
It's 100% sketchy and is still a massive red flag imo, but is somewhat eased by the dashcam footage that shows them showing up to O'Keefe's house and it looks like the taillight is already broke.
What about the home security footage of her arriving home that night showing the taillight intact then showing her backing up into John’s car when she left to go find him?
Page 69 of 159
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News