re: Karen Read murder trial - Not guilty on main - guilty of OUI(DUI) only

I’ve been listening to Canton Confidential. It’s a local nightly news show that is podcasting its broadcast. I find it factual, and not biased towards prosecution or defense.

Edit - local as in Norfolk Co MA

Spotify
YouTube

quote:

---

The DA released a statement that they do intend to retry the case.

---

Blow it out your blowhole LaFleur!!!!

quote:

---

Anyone have a podcast recommendation for this trial? Maybe one that just has a summary of all the testimony presented?

---

Reality Life with Kate Casey

Ep. 1027 - uploaded today

Ep. 1021 Breakdown of everything up to June 25th

They will be doing another all-inclusive podcast as well.

I feel for the family, but the brother comes off kind of cuckish. Whoever is really behind JO's death must be loving this.

Here are some excerpts from a TMZ article on the jury's verdicts.



Karen Read may be tried again for the death of her boyfriend after the judge declared a mistrial, but murder charges may not be on the table ... because according to the defense, the vote on the murder charge was 12 - 0, IN FAVOR OF ACQUITTAL!

Read's lawyer, Alan Jackson, has just filed docs arguing prosecuting Read for 2nd-degree murder a second time would amount to double jeopardy. Shockingly, when the judge declared the mistrial, she didn't say anything about the jury's vote on the murder charge.

We've also learned the jury was unanimous in favor of acquittal on the charge of leaving the scene of an accident where there was injury or death. The only charge on which the jury was deadlocked was vehicular manslaughter, where the jury apparently voted 9 - 3 in favor of guilt.

Attorney Jackson believes the judge had a duty to inform the defense the jury had reached unanimous verdicts on 2 of the 3 charges, which would have given them an opportunity to argue a mistrial should not have been declared. Jackson argues in legal docs the judge should have entered an acquittal on both the murder charge and the charge of leaving the scene of an accident.

If you're confused as to how the jury would be unanimous on leaving the scene of an accident yet split on vehicular manslaughter, it all has to do with intent. The crime of leaving the scene of an accident where there is death or injury requires proof of intent -- that the driver knew someone was hurt or killed. The jury obviously didn't believe Read knew.

Vehicular manslaughter does NOT require proof of intent -- all prosecutors have to prove is reckless conduct. Someone can be reckless and yet not even know they hit someone. Presumably, even if Jackson wins on the double jeopardy issue, Read could still be retried on vehicular manslaughter.

Read the rest here.

I would think the defense would still be concerned about the vote on vehicular homicide since that indicates 9 of them believed she was responsible. The question is whether the prosecution will believe that charge is worth a retrial and what's going to happen with the charges the jury basically threw out.

quote:

---

The only charge on which the jury was deadlocked was vehicular manslaughter, where the jury apparently voted 9 - 3 in favor of guilt.

---

How the frick

Proctor has a misconduct hearing today as well.

quote:

---

I missed the part where he was "framing" her. The article says he called her a whack job and a c*nt but that was it. Did I miss something?

Him being unprofessional and talking shite about a defendant is a long ways from framing her or deserving to be prosecuted.

---

I think the misconduct is about the talking trash piece, but there is absolutely reason to believe he's in cahoots with law enforcement to frame her. This case is absurd. Almost feels like one of those cases that if the world media wasn't watching, she'd be fricked.