- 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 5/23/25 at 8:12 pm to rt3
Posted on 5/23/25 at 8:12 pm to rt3
quote:
seems obvious to me there was a pre-trial ruling saying anything related to that investigator is off limits unless a witness opens the door to it The defense tries to get a witness to open the door... prosecution immediately objects... judge either sustains the objection and/or calls for a sidebar
Not the case. Proctor isn’t being called by the CW. He could be called by the defense as a witness. They would probably rather not call him if they can get the info in through other witnesses. What you are seeing is the defense pushing the limit of what they can get into the record about what Proctor did from a witness who isn’t Proctor. They can, for example, ask someone what they saw Proctor do. They can’t ask why he would do that particular thing. Just an example.
Some of Proctor’s actions can only really come in to evidence via direct questioning of Proctor. The defense is trying to get as much evidence in as they can through other people. They will have to weigh the benefit/risk of calling him versus the information they have not been able to get on the record.
2
Posted on 5/27/25 at 7:22 am to Wiseguy
quote:
They will have to weigh the benefit/risk of calling him versus the information they have not been able to get on the record.
Dude is on record wishing she was dead so no amount of jockeying is going to help his cause
Posted on 5/27/25 at 10:11 am to idlewatcher
Alessi got to voir dire Welcher before his testimony started today about how some changes were made to his report.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 10:15 am to civiltiger07
“Welcher is a dead ringer for Eric Clapton but without the rizz”
--Andrea Burkhart on stream earlier at the start of voir dire.
--Andrea Burkhart on stream earlier at the start of voir dire.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 11:44 am to jclem11
I forgot it started back up today.. Have I missed anything?
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:06 pm to Wiseguy
quote:
Some of Proctor’s actions can only really come in to evidence via direct questioning of Proctor.
What's the downside of calling him? Seems to me that getting him to admit that he lied, coerced statements, and manipulated evidence in this case is prima facia reasonable doubt.
I can't think of a good reason not to call the guy to the stand
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:46 pm to No Colors
quote:
What's the downside of calling him? Seems to me that getting him to admit that he lied, coerced statements, and manipulated evidence in this case is prima facia reasonable doubt. I can't think of a good reason not to call the guy to the stand
Really only issue is if the defense calls him, then the CW is cross examining him. That means they can ask leading questions and do a lot more to rehab his image than if they were only doing direct examination.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 12:49 pm to Wiseguy
I wouldn't imagine it would matter much considering:
1. He was fired for his actions
2. It's well known he was fired
3. He's a POS
For me personally, I hope AJ calls him as a witness and skewers the ever living hell out of him. Proctor was the cover guy.
1. He was fired for his actions
2. It's well known he was fired
3. He's a POS
For me personally, I hope AJ calls him as a witness and skewers the ever living hell out of him. Proctor was the cover guy.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 1:03 pm to idlewatcher
I don't see the down side to the defense calling Proctor. I'm not even sure what the state would question him on. He is the lead investigator for the case and the state didn't call him.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 1:04 pm to civiltiger07
quote:
He is the lead investigator for the case and the state didn't call him.
They are probably trying to hide him
Posted on 5/27/25 at 2:15 pm to idlewatcher
The CW's accident reconstructionis just said on the stand that he can't pinpoint exactly how John O'Keefe was struck.
And WTF is this paint model with a guy similar in size doing a barrel roll and rubbing his arm up and down to get the result he wants.
And WTF is this paint model with a guy similar in size doing a barrel roll and rubbing his arm up and down to get the result he wants.
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 5/27/25 at 2:18 pm to KosmoCramer
I've watched some videos on the backing event, and I can't say I understand what actually happened.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 2:22 pm to AlxTgr
If his arm got ripped up like that, there would be way more DNA and tail light fragments in JOK's arm.
Add in the lack of bruising that would occur if he way hit like that, and that seals the case for me. Literally it cannot have happened how the CW previously stated, and now they are saying they don't even know how he was struck. They can't recreate it.
That's been the defense's point the entire fricking time
this is wild.
Add in the lack of bruising that would occur if he way hit like that, and that seals the case for me. Literally it cannot have happened how the CW previously stated, and now they are saying they don't even know how he was struck. They can't recreate it.
That's been the defense's point the entire fricking time
this is wild.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 2:57 pm to KosmoCramer
I got bit by a dog through a sweatshirt and the marks on my arm looked exactly like the photos. Didn't fully puncture the sweatshirt and really dig into my skin but when I pulled away the teeth left those same gouges and looked exactly like his wounds.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 4:02 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
I've watched some videos on the backing event, and I can't say I understand what actually happened.
Nobody can, which is the entire reason that Read should be found not guilty. Until the commonwealth can prove that O'Keefe was hit by a car, there is no case.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 4:05 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
The CW's accident reconstructionis just said on the stand that he can't pinpoint exactly how John O'Keefe was struck.
I believe this will be the lynchpin in this case for a NG verdict.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 4:12 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
Nobody can, which is the entire reason that Read should be found not guilty. Until the commonwealth can prove that O'Keefe was hit by a car, there is no case.
The blue paint on the tail light, doing a roll over the light, or pressing your arm against the car moving at 2mph was absolutely laughable today.
Do an actual reconstruction. Full speed. Get something that looks even close to what you state happened on a recreated dummy.
They can't. If they could, they would. Let alone the broken bones and significant bruising that would HAVE to come from that.
This post was edited on 5/27/25 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 5/27/25 at 7:52 pm to KosmoCramer
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, I didn’t get to watch today but I thought the prosecution turned over to the defense. This witness was called by the prosecution correct?
Posted on 5/27/25 at 7:59 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
I've watched some videos on the backing event, and I can't say I understand what actually happened.
Well that’s because they are trying to explain something that never happened.
Posted on 5/27/25 at 8:01 pm to 10tiger
quote:
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, I didn’t get to watch today but I thought the prosecution turned over to the defense. This witness was called by the prosecution correct?
Yes it seems this is the last witness that the prosecution will call.
Page 89 of 159
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News