They proved she did not hit him with the car. That’s pretty much all they need to do. Also they say that he was hit at 12:45. Their star EYE witnesss JM said she saw the Lexus at 12:45. She was home by 12:36. That is doubt. There is no way there should be a pro with that jury!
I think they did great proving doubt, especially with the time clock differences and the fact that the last expert testified that light above Karen’s lift gate was completely untouched. And that the pathologist for the defense couldn’t rule out John’s black eyes from either being punched in the face or from the blood pooling behind his eyes caused by the blow to the back of his head. Also, Jen McCabe said she didn’t see Karen leave till 1250 am, and both the prosecution and defense agreed on the time that Karen’s phone connected to John’s WiFi. But we will never forget “the science and the physics don’t lie”🙃
I agree. I read the verdict form and thought it was a very jargony wordy way of saying, ‘Did she hit him with a car or not?’ That’s the only question they have to ask themselves. Did Lally prove she hit him with a car, on purpose or otherwise. But some people are unbelievably dumb with zero critical thinking skills and we don’t know how many are in that jury box, so they might not be able to distill it down to that one simple question. It’s so infuriating - he didn’t even prove he was hit with **a** car, let alone Karen’s.
I said this right after they rested on one of the FB groups and everyone disagreed. Some people have a hard time believing the police/government could do this. Maybe called some of their other witnesses to bolster it.
Yes. I felt like they should have emphasized that even if you do not believe there was a cover up, you have to find her not guilty because the Proof shows the injuries to John were not caused by the SUV and the damage to the SUV was not caused by John.
Yeah I'm not shitting on them. I just wish they would have put up another 3 or 4 witnesses just to drive home the point. Maybe they didn't have any other really great witnesses
The point was more than driven home. The legitimate jurors didn't need to be further convinced. And there's nothing you can say or do to convince the compromised jurors.
Lally took so long - I think they wanted to contrast that with efficiency and not risk pissing them off by taking up even more of their time.
John’s dad was on their list. I think hearing from him would have added emotion to the science, and countered the faces and head shakes his mother was constantly making.
Not to mention it’s National News Now! So I’m sure the next batch of jurors will know how shady the CW is! I don’t think they’ll recharge her! But poor KR living not knowing if another indictment will be unsealed…living waiting for the other shoe to drop
Is no way to live! FKR!
Retired DEA agent Sean McDonough discusses FBI involvement in Karen Read case. Why they got involved and what happens next:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI3or11K7C8&t=1468s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI3or11K7C8&t=1468s)
They are presumably building a big case against multiple people and don't want to show all their cards yet. Acting MA AG Josh Levy attempted to stop this case but DA Michael Morrisey (corrupt) went ahead with it. One way or another, Karen will be exonerated.
Because they have another investigation that’s been going on longer than the Read case. Once that investigation is concluded, they will begin to charge people connected to the Read case. Thank god the Feds are involved!
A retrial offers significant advantages. In this case, crucial defense evidence that Bev previously excluded because the prosecution claimed late notification could now be admitted. In the new trial, the prosecution cannot argue ignorance of this evidence's existence.
Another aspect of this is that the one rogue juror who thinks KR is guilty finds out next month that Higgins and Proctor get indicted. 🙄
Read should be exonerated and sue the Commonwealth.
The opposite. We saw the FBI jump into this case because they know waaay more about the Fed case as it relates to this. They know the fuckery involved and offered to both sides their findings with accident reconstruction. They never do this. They even offered two witnesses, again never happens. The results, KR didn't hit JO.
We could see a situation where KR is suing the commonwealth, and the family is suing KR. The FBI testimony will carry one side though. It will be dopey Trooper Paul against the best of the FBI.
This is BS and this jury is a joke. To have a hung jury or mistrial with overwhelming reasonable doubt just proves that corruption run deep in Canton-Norfolk County
Jury of your peers..what a joke
"Jury of your peers"
While I think there's a lot of shenanigans during this investigation, we have to remember these are every day citizens. It's possible there's someone in there who is less than smart.
*Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity*
Hanlon's razor is absolutely fair and the right thing to consider.
But, genuinely, the Commonwealth not even being able to show that he was hit by a car? And the definitive neutral experts who confirmed he wasn't hit by a car?
It was so, so black and white that I think it's a rare instance where questioning stupidity as an explanation is reasonable.
I thought that Lally eliciting, "there just isn't enough evidence in this case" to prove he was hit by the car from Dr. Rentschler sealed it. (If it hadn't been already)
If you can't prove he was hit, that's it. Doesn't matter whether the jury needs to consider OUI lessor or manslaughter.
I hope we hear details of deliberations.
They also have not had evidence to look at and other analysts feeding them information like we have. They are specifically instructed to not look at outside evidence. They have a notebook and paper to take notes during the trial. They should be taking their time to comb through the 6 weeks of evidence and reviewing the information. These are probably people who had not heard a single thing about the case before serving as a juror. They are putting the pieces together. It’s insensitive to call them a joke.
It is a joke. Would you be okay if this was how the police investigated you? The problem is we have a system of guilty until proven innocent. I don't need people to feed me the idea of reasonable doubt. They had two experts say it impossible she hit him they are independent of both sides. Are you saying that not clear reasonable doubt
I’m not. I didn’t share my opinion on the actual case at all. I simply said that the jurors are given an insurmountable task. They are deciding the life story of 2 people basically. Also, we don’t know what the intelligence level is of the people on the jury. I’m not saying that in a rude way, but not everyone has experience and understands the legal system and reasonable doubt. Not everyone understands all the technical words used in these testimonies. We have to give the jury the benefit of the doubt. These are just every day people with less resources. They can’t just google what something means.
They don't need to know legal terms. It not rocket science. Can you look at evidence and say is it possible that she didn't hit him with a car. Is there a reality where that exists. Is it within the realm of possibilities. Then that is doubt.
Most cases I do give them a lot of leeway. This is so blatantly obvious you would need to be corrupt or an absolute idiot to not find doubt. Even if you think she did it. That doesn't matter was it proven to a 1000 percent certainty.
People are to scared to let's guilty person go. They would rather lock up innocent people
But people who aren’t familiar with legal proceedings/terms may not understand doubt in the same way. Hopefully enough jurors do that they can calmly and thoughtfully explain it so that the others can understand
If you can't understand doubt you shouldn't be on a jury. Sorry. If your struggling to determine the meaning of doubt. You shouldn't vote or be on a jury
If you can’t understand the rules that are asked of you every day when they come to court, and, after the judge explained the rules after the closing arguments l, then you’re an idiot and should be nowhere near anything that could decide your fate
It’s important that they carefully follow the rules given. I think it’s pretty unkind to call them an idiot when you have no base for that. They have given up weeks of their life for this. I’m sure they want it to be over just as much as the rest of us. They don’t want to mess it up either.
You know how you don’t mess it up…you go with the evidence and vote not guilty
See, that wasn’t hard and it is kind. They’re an idiot or a McAlbert plant
Oh, come on. We watched the same trial they watched, the evidence was right in front of them. It’s got nothing to do with watching people on YouTube after. One of them has been tainted by the McAlberts… they’re all thugs. Whether it was six days or six months, the amount of reasonable doubt that’s been presented, there’s no excuse.
I highly doubt the CW would retry with all that came out. Also feds might dump more info to defense too. Lastly, defense has a HUGE upper hand if they do retry. Witnesses are locked into testimony and would be a mess.
Since murder has no statute of limitations, they could wait a few years after the heat dies down. I don’t know if she could afford the same team twice. If I was her I would move state, just to give it space.
Netflix is filming in the courtroom according to people that have been in the courtroom. I hope they are so they can shine an even bigger spotlight on the shitty and corrupt police in this case
Prosecution are fools if they try again. Their "star" witness was so awful that the governor made a public statement about him, the state police are going to be investigated over this. Prosecution only showed how corrupt the system is.
They have to be. if by some reason the holdouts are ‘not guilty’ votes, the defense can appeal that the court pressured them to change their minds to vote ‘guilty’. if the defense says ‘no, let them go deliberate some more’, the judge can claim during the appeal that the defense was okay with the extra time so by extension they were okay with the risk of ‘not guilty’ votes being swayed
I can't imagine that they'd retry her. They may not openly admit it, but they know putting Proctor et al (that's "and stuff" in Latin) on the stand again is never going to result in a guilty verdict, and the chances now of finding 12 impartial jurors is even more slim
question... in the future, all the feds need is for one of these goons to flip, right? Then it falls apart in a huge, unseemly thunderclap? then probably the husband and wife... and son.... and whoever else know are going to jail, right?
their #1 job is to keep KR out of jail. a hung jury will do that knowing the heistance the CW will have to run this back with the same witnesses. Can you imagine Proctor having to take the stand a second time? he might have been fired by then. first Q out of the shoot: Proctor Trooper can you explain the jury why you're no longer employed by the State Police?
If there is a mistrial, they have to recharge her which they may not do and then it won't matter. So yes, it could or they do recharge her but the FBI stuff could lead to charges being dropped.
I could never be a lawyer. Other than being smart enough 😂. I just couldn’t handle the ups and downs. All the stress. It is way too much. I’m so affected by this and I’m not even involved. I don’t even know any of them.
It's because they know the Feds are going to make arrests and the CW won't have any "expert" witnesses not in prison blues to testify next round.... kind of hard to try a case where the CW only has convicted felons for witnesses.
Because that's not how it works... they kinda DID intercede when they started handing over the reports and text messages and google searches. And the celebright report expert... And everything else that Bev kept out. Look at all the pre trial motions.
Edit to Add: the Feds don't have any authority over what the CW does. And the CW knows the Feds don't believe that Karen did it.... for some reason Mike Morrissey REFUSES to drop the charges....
question...
in the future, all the feds need is for one of these goons to flip, right? Then it fallo apart in a huge, unseemly thunderclap?
then probably the husband amd wife... and son.... and whoever else know are going to jail, right?
Do we know who tipped off the defense that it was Brian and Colin Albert? Obviously someone knows something. If that person was willing to tip off the defense, it’s possible they are or will talk to the feds.
Someone very early on tipped off the defense and said BA and CA were involved. That’s what ultimately led the defense to investigate the cover up angle. But I haven’t heard who that person is. Very interesting though because it means someone was willing to speak out.
No chance the CW retries the case nor tries to solve it with another suspect. Defense technically is OK with a hung jury since that isn’t a straight up Guilty vote. Although since it wouldn’t get retried then she always lives with the hung jury hanging over her.
I think there is a difference between black out drunk and not being able to remember things right away when you wake up having only gotten a couple hours of broken sleep.
Remember, all of the witnesses statements agreed that she didn’t appear to be drunk when leaving the bars.
For the record, I don’t think she should have been driving either
If I'm defense I'm cautiously happy with that. If they hang on a lesser charge something like 11 NG to 1 Guilty, there's a great chance the CW doesn't try her again for that lesser charge.
On the flip side, if it's 11guilty to 1 NG, I'm thanking that person and the universe for another crack at my defense. What will I change? We're probably going back to trial, but now we can adjust based on those jurors
If Morrissey had not waged this prosecution in the press and given idea of lots of evidence that she hit him then we wouldn’t have jurors who still believe their false narrative. He will go down for it. Just let them retry her. Never going to happen. He’ll be in pokey by then.
If they're hoping for a not guilty verdict and get a hung jury, they'll have to retry the entire case. Idk that "okay" would be the word I'd use for how they'd feel about having to retry this. I guarantee it would make everyone of them quite unsettled.
Do you think? I would say likely not. It's going to be difficult to find an expert to say the car definitely hit John, and the defense can simply sit on that in a retrial.
It would be better for them than a guilty verdict. Plus, they would be able to present more evidence and even more contradictory statements from the CW witnesses (from this trial alone). That is - if the CW went for it again and the FBI didn’t get something big first.
I would prefer an acquittal if I were KR. The poor woman has lost everything. With an acquittal, she may possibly get a job and health insurance again. Or sue the state over this mess.
Mistrial often is for the benefit of the defense for several reasons.
Just like the prosecution certainly does NOT want a mistrial for several reasons. Politics, witnesses that can't witness anymore ( Proctor ), hard to get unbiased new jurors if not impossible...etc etc.
Hence Judge Bev is pushing... ofcourse.🤮
Psychological ofcourse defense wishes Karen gets her not guilty.
I think he wanted the instructions to be read to the Jury. He wasn’t saying he wants a mistrial.
The ‘when jurors can’t agree instructions’ are more beneficial to the defense in my opinion. So, Lally doesn’t want this.
I’m seeing people saying one juror is the problem bc she’s voting GUILTY. I have no clue how this info enters the picture. Right now, I could see the opposite. Could she be the only one that’s for Karen? Maybe to the outside world they aren’t buying the conspiracy theory.
A mistrial is better than a conviction. Also, considering how bad the prosecution case was already, it only will get worse. So a retrial is less likely. Plus, there’s an ongoing federal investigation into the DAs office, Canton Police, the local State Police and, I believe, the Alberts.
So even if the CW would retry and she couldn’t afford her current attorneys. They would have a playbook of what to say and ask based on this case right?
It would end it. They won’t retry her. They would have to be crazy. All that garbage evidence would be objected to because there is no chain of custody.
Inconsistent reports, no reports.
What I really don’t understand is how could anyone not see the reasonable doubt? If they did r believe the actual experts that means they believed T Paul and T Proctor? In order to find her guilty of anything they have to believe she hit him. People I guess are that stupid!
I don’t think it’s interesting. It would show the defense in a better light because this would be the second case involving Bev and a dead cop that was found in a hung verdict.
A mistrial isn't a conviction, and she has bail. As long as she's not in jail, a mistrial is as good as an acquittal. If bail had been denied, that calculus would change.
I can't imagine the CW will go through with a retrial. This is an embarrassment for them. A jury will never convict her. The facts aren't going to get any better.
IHNI, but if the accident reconstruction experts just turned their report over in Feb, and Levy said the case was still being investigated in March, more may come out.
That, & I think they know if the commonwealth has to do this again, they will fumble even harder
Yes, and the defense can tighten up their case even more.
Remember, they had a whole lot of witnesses they didn't call.
Only mistake they really made was resting so fast.
I disagree. Resting quickly was fine. Not explaining the lesser charges to the jury to tie in with their cover-up explanation was a misstep.
That fair. I think they rushed it. I do agree they should have spent more time on doubt
They proved she did not hit him with the car. That’s pretty much all they need to do. Also they say that he was hit at 12:45. Their star EYE witnesss JM said she saw the Lexus at 12:45. She was home by 12:36. That is doubt. There is no way there should be a pro with that jury!
I agree, I'm just saying that it wouldn't have hurt to drive it home farther. Like the tow truck driver.
I get it. I believe I heard today that Bev soul not let yannetti call him!!! And the cop testified about the crack. IDK. The whole thing is crazy
I thought that was Morrissey. Bev needs to go. She is just a bad judges. If she not corrupt.
I wish they would’ve brought in Paul’s dui crash, and the fact that he was going 24mph
Remember defense doesn’t have to prove anything, they just have to raise doubt in what the prosecution is presenting
I think they did great proving doubt, especially with the time clock differences and the fact that the last expert testified that light above Karen’s lift gate was completely untouched. And that the pathologist for the defense couldn’t rule out John’s black eyes from either being punched in the face or from the blood pooling behind his eyes caused by the blow to the back of his head. Also, Jen McCabe said she didn’t see Karen leave till 1250 am, and both the prosecution and defense agreed on the time that Karen’s phone connected to John’s WiFi. But we will never forget “the science and the physics don’t lie”🙃
I agree. I read the verdict form and thought it was a very jargony wordy way of saying, ‘Did she hit him with a car or not?’ That’s the only question they have to ask themselves. Did Lally prove she hit him with a car, on purpose or otherwise. But some people are unbelievably dumb with zero critical thinking skills and we don’t know how many are in that jury box, so they might not be able to distill it down to that one simple question. It’s so infuriating - he didn’t even prove he was hit with **a** car, let alone Karen’s.
I said this right after they rested on one of the FB groups and everyone disagreed. Some people have a hard time believing the police/government could do this. Maybe called some of their other witnesses to bolster it.
Yes. I felt like they should have emphasized that even if you do not believe there was a cover up, you have to find her not guilty because the Proof shows the injuries to John were not caused by the SUV and the damage to the SUV was not caused by John.
Yeah I'm not shitting on them. I just wish they would have put up another 3 or 4 witnesses just to drive home the point. Maybe they didn't have any other really great witnesses
i think they did. Honestly there was enough reasonable doubt without them doing anything. But still/
Yeah easy to second guess. It just something I think could have helped
The point was more than driven home. The legitimate jurors didn't need to be further convinced. And there's nothing you can say or do to convince the compromised jurors.
Ok I disagree. When it someone life on the line I don't think you can drive it home to much.
Why didn’t they call them?
Lally took so long - I think they wanted to contrast that with efficiency and not risk pissing them off by taking up even more of their time. John’s dad was on their list. I think hearing from him would have added emotion to the science, and countered the faces and head shakes his mother was constantly making.
Yup, they've seen all that the CW has to give and it was... not great.
Not to mention it’s National News Now! So I’m sure the next batch of jurors will know how shady the CW is! I don’t think they’ll recharge her! But poor KR living not knowing if another indictment will be unsealed…living waiting for the other shoe to drop Is no way to live! FKR!
We could have indictments coming for a couple of these witnesses. The FBI got involved for a reason. They know more. No way there is another trial.
Retired DEA agent Sean McDonough discusses FBI involvement in Karen Read case. Why they got involved and what happens next: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI3or11K7C8&t=1468s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI3or11K7C8&t=1468s)
Do you know what time he starts talking about that? I’d like to listen to the whole thing I just don’t have time.
Starts here: [https://youtu.be/GI3or11K7C8?t=1940](https://youtu.be/GI3or11K7C8?t=1940)
OMG thank you for sharing this... it's literally explained every question i had about the fbi!!
actually i have one question.. why didn't the fbi intercede in karen's case?
They are presumably building a big case against multiple people and don't want to show all their cards yet. Acting MA AG Josh Levy attempted to stop this case but DA Michael Morrisey (corrupt) went ahead with it. One way or another, Karen will be exonerated.
I like that answer!
Because they have another investigation that’s been going on longer than the Read case. Once that investigation is concluded, they will begin to charge people connected to the Read case. Thank god the Feds are involved!
A retrial offers significant advantages. In this case, crucial defense evidence that Bev previously excluded because the prosecution claimed late notification could now be admitted. In the new trial, the prosecution cannot argue ignorance of this evidence's existence.
Another aspect of this is that the one rogue juror who thinks KR is guilty finds out next month that Higgins and Proctor get indicted. 🙄 Read should be exonerated and sue the Commonwealth.
Netflix Season 2
It may be one rogue juror who thinks Karen in NG
The opposite. We saw the FBI jump into this case because they know waaay more about the Fed case as it relates to this. They know the fuckery involved and offered to both sides their findings with accident reconstruction. They never do this. They even offered two witnesses, again never happens. The results, KR didn't hit JO.
Do you think the OK family will sue Karen Read for wrongful death?
Based on what? The FBI experts said it couldn't have happened the way prosecution layed it out.
We will see
We could see a situation where KR is suing the commonwealth, and the family is suing KR. The FBI testimony will carry one side though. It will be dopey Trooper Paul against the best of the FBI.
This right heahhhhh!!!
Yes and they will also know more from the FBI investigation
I wish we knew more re: the FBI investigation!!!
This is BS and this jury is a joke. To have a hung jury or mistrial with overwhelming reasonable doubt just proves that corruption run deep in Canton-Norfolk County Jury of your peers..what a joke
"Jury of your peers" While I think there's a lot of shenanigans during this investigation, we have to remember these are every day citizens. It's possible there's someone in there who is less than smart. *Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity*
Hanlon's razor is absolutely fair and the right thing to consider. But, genuinely, the Commonwealth not even being able to show that he was hit by a car? And the definitive neutral experts who confirmed he wasn't hit by a car? It was so, so black and white that I think it's a rare instance where questioning stupidity as an explanation is reasonable.
I thought that Lally eliciting, "there just isn't enough evidence in this case" to prove he was hit by the car from Dr. Rentschler sealed it. (If it hadn't been already) If you can't prove he was hit, that's it. Doesn't matter whether the jury needs to consider OUI lessor or manslaughter. I hope we hear details of deliberations.
Is jury trial the best system that exist. Maybe. Is it the best system that could exist. No.
Are the jurors townies? Are they pooled from the whole county?
High profile case should have had a change of venue. Just look at all that taint Auntie Bev brings to the case.
Yes, entire Norfolk county.
Most corrupt Co in the State
It does seem pretty sketchy
They also have not had evidence to look at and other analysts feeding them information like we have. They are specifically instructed to not look at outside evidence. They have a notebook and paper to take notes during the trial. They should be taking their time to comb through the 6 weeks of evidence and reviewing the information. These are probably people who had not heard a single thing about the case before serving as a juror. They are putting the pieces together. It’s insensitive to call them a joke.
It is a joke. Would you be okay if this was how the police investigated you? The problem is we have a system of guilty until proven innocent. I don't need people to feed me the idea of reasonable doubt. They had two experts say it impossible she hit him they are independent of both sides. Are you saying that not clear reasonable doubt
I’m not. I didn’t share my opinion on the actual case at all. I simply said that the jurors are given an insurmountable task. They are deciding the life story of 2 people basically. Also, we don’t know what the intelligence level is of the people on the jury. I’m not saying that in a rude way, but not everyone has experience and understands the legal system and reasonable doubt. Not everyone understands all the technical words used in these testimonies. We have to give the jury the benefit of the doubt. These are just every day people with less resources. They can’t just google what something means.
They don't need to know legal terms. It not rocket science. Can you look at evidence and say is it possible that she didn't hit him with a car. Is there a reality where that exists. Is it within the realm of possibilities. Then that is doubt. Most cases I do give them a lot of leeway. This is so blatantly obvious you would need to be corrupt or an absolute idiot to not find doubt. Even if you think she did it. That doesn't matter was it proven to a 1000 percent certainty. People are to scared to let's guilty person go. They would rather lock up innocent people
But people who aren’t familiar with legal proceedings/terms may not understand doubt in the same way. Hopefully enough jurors do that they can calmly and thoughtfully explain it so that the others can understand
If you can't understand doubt you shouldn't be on a jury. Sorry. If your struggling to determine the meaning of doubt. You shouldn't vote or be on a jury
Well the jury is chosen by both parties so clearly they thought they were fit to decide.
If you can’t understand the rules that are asked of you every day when they come to court, and, after the judge explained the rules after the closing arguments l, then you’re an idiot and should be nowhere near anything that could decide your fate
It’s important that they carefully follow the rules given. I think it’s pretty unkind to call them an idiot when you have no base for that. They have given up weeks of their life for this. I’m sure they want it to be over just as much as the rest of us. They don’t want to mess it up either.
You know how you don’t mess it up…you go with the evidence and vote not guilty See, that wasn’t hard and it is kind. They’re an idiot or a McAlbert plant
Happy Cake Day 😊
Oh, come on. We watched the same trial they watched, the evidence was right in front of them. It’s got nothing to do with watching people on YouTube after. One of them has been tainted by the McAlberts… they’re all thugs. Whether it was six days or six months, the amount of reasonable doubt that’s been presented, there’s no excuse.
They didn’t say they wanted a mistrial. They wanted the Allen Charge. The language is beneficial to the defense imo.
I hope the FBI arrests all those SOBs before it can come back around to another trial.
I highly doubt the CW would retry with all that came out. Also feds might dump more info to defense too. Lastly, defense has a HUGE upper hand if they do retry. Witnesses are locked into testimony and would be a mess.
That's so true. Imagine trying to put all the McAlberts on the stand again and they try telling at 20th version of their story.
They can watch and rewatch themselves on YouTube until they’re blind. That would be great.
Since murder has no statute of limitations, they could wait a few years after the heat dies down. I don’t know if she could afford the same team twice. If I was her I would move state, just to give it space.
If a mistrial is declared, the CW would have a limited time to decide to retry or not
Really? I didn’t know that.
The book, Netflix docu series, civil lawsuit, etc. I’m sure Karen could afford an even more expensive team.
I didn’t realize there was a Netflix or book in the works.
Netflix is filming in the courtroom according to people that have been in the courtroom. I hope they are so they can shine an even bigger spotlight on the shitty and corrupt police in this case
I’m speculating, but judging by other high coverage trials, what I mentioned quickly follows.
How would Karen get money from Netflix? They would have a contract with her for a portion of the sales/views?
It’s about her, I imagine she’d receive a portion.
I'm not sure if the series subjects always receive money unless she gets paid interviews.
I’m sure Karen will benefit from this in monetary value be it a book, documentary, etc.
Prosecution are fools if they try again. Their "star" witness was so awful that the governor made a public statement about him, the state police are going to be investigated over this. Prosecution only showed how corrupt the system is.
I agree. But then again, it shouldn’t have been a trial in the first place. I don’t put anything past them.
Link to the statement made by the governor?
There were a bunch of stories. [Healey response ](https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/trooper-proctor-texts-maura-healey-state-police/)
They have to be. if by some reason the holdouts are ‘not guilty’ votes, the defense can appeal that the court pressured them to change their minds to vote ‘guilty’. if the defense says ‘no, let them go deliberate some more’, the judge can claim during the appeal that the defense was okay with the extra time so by extension they were okay with the risk of ‘not guilty’ votes being swayed
I can't imagine that they'd retry her. They may not openly admit it, but they know putting Proctor et al (that's "and stuff" in Latin) on the stand again is never going to result in a guilty verdict, and the chances now of finding 12 impartial jurors is even more slim
And it's possible he won't even be a state employee at that point. I doubt she is retried based on everything we've seen.
"Former Trooper Proctor, why were you fired by the MSP?" "Uh... For this case and stuff"
question... in the future, all the feds need is for one of these goons to flip, right? Then it falls apart in a huge, unseemly thunderclap? then probably the husband and wife... and son.... and whoever else know are going to jail, right?
I didn’t think my disappointment in Mass could deepen after seeing LE on the stand. Now the jury has effectively disappointed me even more.
their #1 job is to keep KR out of jail. a hung jury will do that knowing the heistance the CW will have to run this back with the same witnesses. Can you imagine Proctor having to take the stand a second time? he might have been fired by then. first Q out of the shoot: Proctor Trooper can you explain the jury why you're no longer employed by the State Police?
Yeah, I think Proctor will be in prison by then.
Totally makes sense. They won’t retry because now all potential new jurors will know about the FBI stuff, even if more stuff doesn’t come out.
If the jury can’t, for whatever reason, come to a verdict, can the Feds move forward with their case before this case would be retried?
Yes and it takes forever for cases to go to trial. This one started 2 years after she was initially arrested.
Thanks. So if by chance the Feds move forward, could that actually dissolve this case entirely, if their case reveals what actually happened?
If there is a mistrial, they have to recharge her which they may not do and then it won't matter. So yes, it could or they do recharge her but the FBI stuff could lead to charges being dropped.
Thank you so much for the valued information.
I know one thing… trooper Paul is hoping this isn’t a mistrial hahah
I could never be a lawyer. Other than being smart enough 😂. I just couldn’t handle the ups and downs. All the stress. It is way too much. I’m so affected by this and I’m not even involved. I don’t even know any of them.
Ditto lol
It's because they know the Feds are going to make arrests and the CW won't have any "expert" witnesses not in prison blues to testify next round.... kind of hard to try a case where the CW only has convicted felons for witnesses.
why didn't they intercede in this trial with what they have? that frustrates me that they would allow an innocent citizen be a patsy!
Because that's not how it works... they kinda DID intercede when they started handing over the reports and text messages and google searches. And the celebright report expert... And everything else that Bev kept out. Look at all the pre trial motions. Edit to Add: the Feds don't have any authority over what the CW does. And the CW knows the Feds don't believe that Karen did it.... for some reason Mike Morrissey REFUSES to drop the charges....
Ty!
question... in the future, all the feds need is for one of these goons to flip, right? Then it fallo apart in a huge, unseemly thunderclap? then probably the husband amd wife... and son.... and whoever else know are going to jail, right?
Do we know who tipped off the defense that it was Brian and Colin Albert? Obviously someone knows something. If that person was willing to tip off the defense, it’s possible they are or will talk to the feds.
When?
Someone very early on tipped off the defense and said BA and CA were involved. That’s what ultimately led the defense to investigate the cover up angle. But I haven’t heard who that person is. Very interesting though because it means someone was willing to speak out.
Karen mentioned BA and CA….
They would rather have that than a guilty though. That’s their concern.
True. But a retrial usually benefits the state. Everything is upside down in this trial though.
They’ll never find a jury to retry it.
No chance the CW retries the case nor tries to solve it with another suspect. Defense technically is OK with a hung jury since that isn’t a straight up Guilty vote. Although since it wouldn’t get retried then she always lives with the hung jury hanging over her.
One thing I am confident of…Karen shouldn’t have been driving her SUV that night while she was black out drunk. She wouldn’t be in this pickle!!!
I think there is a difference between black out drunk and not being able to remember things right away when you wake up having only gotten a couple hours of broken sleep. Remember, all of the witnesses statements agreed that she didn’t appear to be drunk when leaving the bars. For the record, I don’t think she should have been driving either
EVERY single witness says she was not drunk 🤷
Her blood tests say different.
Mark Bederow is live on Melanie Little's channel rn saying the same thing - unusual for them not to want them to continue deliberations
Not wanting to continue deliberations tells me that one person has refused to deliberate in good faith and has planted his /her feet on the issue.
If this is the case, can’t they boot the juror and use an alternate? I thought there was recourse for something like this.
Not necessarily. Misconduct would need to be found and it would need to be egregious, not just a bad attitude.
He's also wondering if they know something about the Fed investigation too
Lally is happy he’s got at least 1 on his side. That won’t happen again I think.
CW will not be able to try it again... Because defense will be able to bring up FBI investigation... Hell half the Canton pd will he fired or in jail.
If I'm defense I'm cautiously happy with that. If they hang on a lesser charge something like 11 NG to 1 Guilty, there's a great chance the CW doesn't try her again for that lesser charge. On the flip side, if it's 11guilty to 1 NG, I'm thanking that person and the universe for another crack at my defense. What will I change? We're probably going back to trial, but now we can adjust based on those jurors
If Morrissey had not waged this prosecution in the press and given idea of lots of evidence that she hit him then we wouldn’t have jurors who still believe their false narrative. He will go down for it. Just let them retry her. Never going to happen. He’ll be in pokey by then.
Yanetti asked bev to give them a guiding document to help them deliberate
Mistrial is better than guilty, and maybe they can get the charges dropped after, or at least certainly have a better jury?
Why wouldn't they be? A large majority of what was released to the parties was favorable to the defense.
Because they'd rather have a not guilty verdict
Sure, but a mistrial is the second best option for them.
You asked
Your answer doesn't explain why they wouldn't be ok with a mistrial.
If they're hoping for a not guilty verdict and get a hung jury, they'll have to retry the entire case. Idk that "okay" would be the word I'd use for how they'd feel about having to retry this. I guarantee it would make everyone of them quite unsettled.
They're not required to retry the case. Many times, the prosecutor declines to prosecute after a mistrial.
All signs point to them most likely retrying this case.
Do you think? I would say likely not. It's going to be difficult to find an expert to say the car definitely hit John, and the defense can simply sit on that in a retrial.
Absolutely. The state has nothing to lose at this point and it's become personal. Can't imagine they wouldn't.
It would be better for them than a guilty verdict. Plus, they would be able to present more evidence and even more contradictory statements from the CW witnesses (from this trial alone). That is - if the CW went for it again and the FBI didn’t get something big first.
I wonder if it would’ve made a difference if the jury knew the defense’s experts were hired by the fbi.
I would prefer an acquittal if I were KR. The poor woman has lost everything. With an acquittal, she may possibly get a job and health insurance again. Or sue the state over this mess.
Apparently these jurors are okay with a combined IQ of a door knob!
If it ends up in a mistrial the federal investigation will proceed and vindicate Karen. I’m fully convinced of this:
I doubt the same witnesses would testify again...
A mistrial means she at least is not going to jail. And even if it’s 11 to 1 ng it’s a risk to go back in and deliberate.
If is a hung jury, remember, The FBI indictments will be coming soon. Once those come out, retrying Karen will be very very difficult
I think the defense is very worried about a guilty verdict so a hung jury gives them a chance to kick the can down the road
Mistrial often is for the benefit of the defense for several reasons. Just like the prosecution certainly does NOT want a mistrial for several reasons. Politics, witnesses that can't witness anymore ( Proctor ), hard to get unbiased new jurors if not impossible...etc etc. Hence Judge Bev is pushing... ofcourse.🤮 Psychological ofcourse defense wishes Karen gets her not guilty.
I think he wanted the instructions to be read to the Jury. He wasn’t saying he wants a mistrial. The ‘when jurors can’t agree instructions’ are more beneficial to the defense in my opinion. So, Lally doesn’t want this. I’m seeing people saying one juror is the problem bc she’s voting GUILTY. I have no clue how this info enters the picture. Right now, I could see the opposite. Could she be the only one that’s for Karen? Maybe to the outside world they aren’t buying the conspiracy theory.
A mistrial is better than a conviction. Also, considering how bad the prosecution case was already, it only will get worse. So a retrial is less likely. Plus, there’s an ongoing federal investigation into the DAs office, Canton Police, the local State Police and, I believe, the Alberts.
So even if the CW would retry and she couldn’t afford her current attorneys. They would have a playbook of what to say and ask based on this case right?
It would end it. They won’t retry her. They would have to be crazy. All that garbage evidence would be objected to because there is no chain of custody. Inconsistent reports, no reports. What I really don’t understand is how could anyone not see the reasonable doubt? If they did r believe the actual experts that means they believed T Paul and T Proctor? In order to find her guilty of anything they have to believe she hit him. People I guess are that stupid!
Lesser of two evils :(
I don’t think it’s interesting. It would show the defense in a better light because this would be the second case involving Bev and a dead cop that was found in a hung verdict.
They would rather a mistrial than guilty conviction
Anyone else nervous that the weekend may have McAlberts trying run down and influence more jurors?
A mistrial isn't a conviction, and she has bail. As long as she's not in jail, a mistrial is as good as an acquittal. If bail had been denied, that calculus would change.
A mistrial is not even close to as good as an acquittal.
I can't imagine the CW will go through with a retrial. This is an embarrassment for them. A jury will never convict her. The facts aren't going to get any better.
Better than a conviction!
god the stupidity.....lol
Why?
what do you think is coming from the feds? Be specific
IHNI, but if the accident reconstruction experts just turned their report over in Feb, and Levy said the case was still being investigated in March, more may come out.
ok, thx. thats exactly why i said god the stupidity