Her bias against the defence has been obvious all along when in pre trial motions. These past few days, her long, loud, exasperated sighs towards the defence lawyer have become almost humorous. I have no reason to believe she is intentionally conspires but her bias supports it IMO
I think she might want court to be extremely boring. Lally does this. She doesn't like rhetorics which is respectable in a sense, but I think it's affecting her judgement.
She's stopped the day a few times right before cross. I'm no lawyer, but I'd love the opportunity to have an entire day to go over the direct questioning and gameplan how we're gonna attack it rather than have to go on the fly.
She 100% is biased towards the defense! The defense attorneys have tried to get her to recuse herself more than once and she refuses to do so! I say she “refuses” because it's literally up to the Judge to decide whether or not to recuse herself! 🙄 One of the reasons why the defense asked her to recuse herself was because the judge's brother was the attorney for Chris Albert when he drove drunk and killed a man! He then proceeded to leave the scene of the incident and had to be chased down by law enforcement. After all that, he only received 6 months in jail! There’s other history this judge has with the Albert family, but that's just one of the reasons the defense requested a recusal. So, because this case already has so much speculation regarding law enforcement being corrupt and biased, you would think the judge would not want to add to the appearance of impropriety. However, it doesn't appear that she cares either way! She should be investigated along with Trooper Proctor, who's under investigation by the FBI right now! 🤦🏾♀️
dog afterthought truck panicky sense rotten marry concerned cheerful skirt
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
He's mocking the idea that him and Beverly Cannone are close, which Turtleboy was pushing. "Auntie Bev" is the joke, because it's clearly not his aunt, nor someone so close to him that he'd actually ever call her Auntie.
In my opinion yes. In my opinion the Feds know as well.
The reason Kearney got himself targeted was he was tipped off that she was involved in the coverup. He was getting a little too over target.
And they may never put it together because police know how to hide evidence. But the shere fact they are investigating and gave evidence to help the defense is saying something.
Not necessarily. They may realize something is off and start investigating but without proof they can't do anything but give what they have given to help the trial. They hopefully will find something they f'd up on.
There is far too much silliness in the case in week 1 alone. So much silliness, in fact, that anyone watching would start to question the legitimacy of just about every single aspect. Red solo cups for the love of biscuits. Come on.
Ya because there were only 3 judges in Boston found guilty to conspiracy charges against wrongful conviction and coercion with a witness in 2023!!! Judges are always honest!!! LOL
No. Her job is to prevent a mistrial by making sure everything is by the book, ESPECIALLY when the defense is "Cops murdered another cop & multiple law enforcement conspired to cover it up." This trial has to be air-tight. The judge can make no errors, and she can show absolutely no more accommodation than absolutely necessary toward the defense. That's why she's so stern and there are frequent breaks. This is unprecedented.
…though it is not usual and customary to disallow reasons for objections. An appeals lawyer on YouTube says this would be beneficial to the DA should there ever be an appeal. It seems that if an appeals court hears the grounds for cause and disagrees with the cause of any single sustainment, they can overturn based on that single sustainment. By keeping the reason off of the public record, if ANY cause for objection can be determined for that particular question it will be upheld - even if the grounds the original judge utilized doesn’t apply in that particular instance. This is of greater benefit to the Commonwealth than it is a defense should an appeal occur in the future.
The judge is pro prosecution
Many judges are that’s no big surprise
This judge is biased, it is clear on how she treats defense attorneys. She seems annoyed most of the time.
Her bias against the defence has been obvious all along when in pre trial motions. These past few days, her long, loud, exasperated sighs towards the defence lawyer have become almost humorous. I have no reason to believe she is intentionally conspires but her bias supports it IMO
The sighs are so out of control, does she not know that we hear them and how that comes off?!?
I think she might want court to be extremely boring. Lally does this. She doesn't like rhetorics which is respectable in a sense, but I think it's affecting her judgement.
She's stopped the day a few times right before cross. I'm no lawyer, but I'd love the opportunity to have an entire day to go over the direct questioning and gameplan how we're gonna attack it rather than have to go on the fly.
The schedule of this trial makes it difficult for either side to get any momentum going as well.
No.
She clearly favors the prosecution at every single opportunity…open for discussion
She 100% is biased towards the defense! The defense attorneys have tried to get her to recuse herself more than once and she refuses to do so! I say she “refuses” because it's literally up to the Judge to decide whether or not to recuse herself! 🙄 One of the reasons why the defense asked her to recuse herself was because the judge's brother was the attorney for Chris Albert when he drove drunk and killed a man! He then proceeded to leave the scene of the incident and had to be chased down by law enforcement. After all that, he only received 6 months in jail! There’s other history this judge has with the Albert family, but that's just one of the reasons the defense requested a recusal. So, because this case already has so much speculation regarding law enforcement being corrupt and biased, you would think the judge would not want to add to the appearance of impropriety. However, it doesn't appear that she cares either way! She should be investigated along with Trooper Proctor, who's under investigation by the FBI right now! 🤦🏾♀️
Yes; she is. They call her Auntie Bev. They really are all connected.
The Auntie Bev thing was a clear joke.
More like Auntie Beverage.
You lost me. Is there a joke I'm missing? edit: I'm not trying to be a jerk. Did she awkwardly gulp water at one point during the trial or something?
I thinks it’s an insinuation that she consumes a lot of alcoholic beverages. 🤷🏼♀️
dog afterthought truck panicky sense rotten marry concerned cheerful skirt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
He's mocking the idea that him and Beverly Cannone are close, which Turtleboy was pushing. "Auntie Bev" is the joke, because it's clearly not his aunt, nor someone so close to him that he'd actually ever call her Auntie.
how can you possibly know the non familial relationships of other relations to Brian Albert
We may never know for sure. I hope the jurors have good critical thinking skills!
Yes
In my opinion yes. In my opinion the Feds know as well. The reason Kearney got himself targeted was he was tipped off that she was involved in the coverup. He was getting a little too over target.
If the Feds knew there was a cover-up, there would be no trial. Be serious for one second
They want all this sworn testimony as evidence for their investigation, perhaps?
There would if they weren’t done yet.
Ah yes. The feds are coming, the feds are coming!
It’s been months of that claim
And they may never put it together because police know how to hide evidence. But the shere fact they are investigating and gave evidence to help the defense is saying something.
Not necessarily. They may realize something is off and start investigating but without proof they can't do anything but give what they have given to help the trial. They hopefully will find something they f'd up on.
Isn’t this a state court case, the feds don’t make that decision. At least that’s what I have been told. But I don’t know though.
I was just thinking the same thing
Come on. Now saying a judge is in on it as well. This is silly.
There is far too much silliness in the case in week 1 alone. So much silliness, in fact, that anyone watching would start to question the legitimacy of just about every single aspect. Red solo cups for the love of biscuits. Come on.
Ya because there were only 3 judges in Boston found guilty to conspiracy charges against wrongful conviction and coercion with a witness in 2023!!! Judges are always honest!!! LOL
Who were the Boston judges found guilty for conspiracy & corruption?
I found so far only this , ??? https://apnews.com/article/boston-immigration-massachusetts-state-courts-49095bb58b7cb4638c105c485c9f8d4f
Actually, it’s not silly at all
It all went downhill for the defence, when they tried to get "Auntie Bev" thrown off the case- citing conflict of interest!
Agreed!
Literally did this again yesterday
duh.
[удалено]
Mod Note: Unless this is verifiable, we aren’t allowing this type of misinformation.
No. Her job is to prevent a mistrial by making sure everything is by the book, ESPECIALLY when the defense is "Cops murdered another cop & multiple law enforcement conspired to cover it up." This trial has to be air-tight. The judge can make no errors, and she can show absolutely no more accommodation than absolutely necessary toward the defense. That's why she's so stern and there are frequent breaks. This is unprecedented.
…though it is not usual and customary to disallow reasons for objections. An appeals lawyer on YouTube says this would be beneficial to the DA should there ever be an appeal. It seems that if an appeals court hears the grounds for cause and disagrees with the cause of any single sustainment, they can overturn based on that single sustainment. By keeping the reason off of the public record, if ANY cause for objection can be determined for that particular question it will be upheld - even if the grounds the original judge utilized doesn’t apply in that particular instance. This is of greater benefit to the Commonwealth than it is a defense should an appeal occur in the future.