Karen Read Trial

[Fuzzybabyducks]

Just watched the documentary. Crazy case but yeah, she ran the guy over.

Yeah she def did it … but people like conspiracy theories…. But she was drunk and hit him… she didn’t mean to kill him but she def did

 

[Red Beard]

Just my opinion on what was the most likely occurrence. A crazy drunk lady hitting her boyfriend with her car during a fight, coming to the realization that she may have seriously hurt him once she sobered up, and panicking and frantically searching for him doesn’t seem that much of a stretch.

I think what is lost in this is the levels of corruption that Massachusetts law enforcement is capable of. That is where I come from so I suppose my willingness to believe this particular set of conspiracy theories is I have seen A LOT of crazy stuff. It isn't past my experiences to have a giant coverup/frame-job.

So basically the state is hoping to find a full jury of people who don't understand "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Yeah this is a BIG thing for me. Reasonable doubt is everywhere and a lot of people involved in this case acted out of character establishing reasonable doubt against the prosecution's narrative.

i hope you’re never put on a jury

lol juries are full of people that already have their mind made up.

Yeah she def did it … but people like conspiracy theories…. But she was drunk and hit him… she didn’t mean to kill him but she def did

Saying "definitely" is pretty wild. I don't think she is an innocent party in terms of her actions generally speaking but I do not believe she actually hit him in her vehicle. Lots of holes in this case and as someone that was on an evidence recovery team with FBI training (I am not FBI but went through schooling they put on), I will say that the evidence recovery methods utilized here are so sketchy. Like evidence recovery 101 and this alone creates reasonable doubt on the case.

 

[Fuzzybabyducks]

no cover up . He was a cop also and would of had friends on the force that would of called that out,

The evidence collection happened during the aftermath of a blizzard so they missed some stuff at first but there is nothing that says she didn’t do it . She has a good defense attorney I will say that, but every murder trial has stuff that can be spun.

Do people actually believe he went to a party full of friends, they beat him up ( for no reason) had a dog attack him then they dragged him outside and put him in the FRONT yard …. Where anyone could have seen this … over drunk girl gets in fight with boyfriend, backs up at a very high speed( captured in her cars system) hits him (tail light, steering wheel jolt) then comes back and tells people she hit him …( she later claimed she said “did I hit him” but she’s the only one who heard that as everyone else said she said “I hit him”)

The defenses job is to place reasonable doubt in people’s mind … in every trial they try to do it … but an investigator texting she’s a hot bitch with no ass doesn’t mean she didn’t do it ,.. it’s a nice little distraction but that bitch did it .

That being said I don’t think anyone should have to go through a trial after a hung jury, if they can’t convince the jury the first time that’s in the state …. Doesn’t mean she didn’t do it though

 

[ricc505]

I think a lot of film and TV has corrupted the general public's view of police work and prosecution.

Jurors are expecting a smoking gun presented by a competent prosecutor. People think police academy actually prepares you for dealing with everything including murder. I know a few detectives and they are not Poirot or even Jessica Fletcher.

And the idea that cops don't beat each other up over nothing? I've seen it. I was tossed 2 guns so 2 cops could have a extremely drunken fist fight on the side of the road. They are all banging each other and each other's wives and breaking up marriages. Cops are normal people except with extraordinary power. Cops get up to real shady and real stupid shit.

That being said it reads like she is guilty. I think I'd be a nightmare on a jury

 

[Fury]

Doesn’t mean she didn’t do it though

The key is they didn't prove it.

I've been in the jury on a murder trial. It's a hell of a responsibility. One life has ended and people want justice. Another person's future is being determined. It's a lot easier to say "she probably did it" here than it is to say "guilty" there.

My case ended with a guilty verdict and a life sentence plus 25 years for a guy in his early twenties.

You don't want to leave with doubt that you were correct in such cases.

 

[Fuzzybabyducks]

The key is they didn't prove it.

I've been in the jury on a murder trial. It's a hell of a responsibility. One life has ended and people want justice. Another person's future is being determined. It's a lot easier to say "she probably did it" here than it is to say "guilty" there.

My case ended with a guilty verdict and a life sentence plus 25 years for a guy in his early twenties.

You don't want to leave with doubt that you were correct in such cases.

right . But I’m not in a jury .. so “reasonable doubt” doesn’t mean shit to me . . I said she did it, which once you see past the lawyers games, most people would believe . I never said if I was in that court room I would of convicted her or that she should of been found guilty.. I know the jury doesn’t see everything and is asked to strike things . All I said is she did it ,.. and that she shouldn’t have to go through this again… if the state can’t get a guilty verdict the first time they shouldn’t be allowed to re try her . But she for sure killed that dude… don’t think she meant to but her drunk ass did.


How long was your case? That’s gotta suck to be in that position

 

[Cartiac]

right . But I’m not in a jury .. so “reasonable doubt” doesn’t mean shit to me . . I said she did it, which once you see past the lawyers games, most people would believe . I never said if I was in that court room I would of convicted her or that she should of been found guilty.. I know the jury doesn’t see everything and is asked to strike things . All I said is she did it ,.. and that she shouldn’t have to go through this again… if the state can’t get a guilty verdict the first time they shouldn’t be allowed to re try her . But she for sure killed that dude… don’t think she meant to but her drunk ass did.

Of course you can say whatever you want, but most people do not believe the same, public support is heavily on her side.

The evidence in the case is also so overwhelmingly in her favor it is very hard to understand how anyone could believe the guy died due to being hit by a car and there is an incredible amount of evidence contradicting the prosecution's case.

IMO this is a clear case of institutional corruption that is very difficult to beat, but what the state didn't expect was this lady being able to bring in one of the very best defense lawyers in the country.

I do fully agree if the state can't prove guilt the first time because the jury wasn't unanimous, they should not be given a second chance, especially considering we now know the jury was unanimously not guilty on 2 of the 3 charges, the judge just never asked.

 

[ICHEERTHEBULL]

I was recommended this video for some reason



Have paying attention to this retrial since and if there are not perjury convictions after this I would be amazed. The defense have been Ivan to the prosecutions Apollo

 

[RemyR]

My question is this:

In the original trial the footage of the cops examine the car was flipped. Why the fuck did they do that?

 

[llperez22]

my wife has followed this case as close as you can follow a case. has listened to the live stream every day of the trial. has watched online lawyers do their breakdown etc... She thinks that she did it but that the state was piss poor in proving it and that she wouldnt be found guilty. But now my wife is starting to change her mind, this second trial seems to be going better for the prosecution than the first trial and now she thinks she will be found guilty.

 

[Thrawn33]

Watched the doc on Netfix and I'm aware it was shot for entertainment.

I think she did it but the Defence was so good at promoting reasonable doubt, and the prosecution was out of their league. It was Prime Bones Jones vs a local amateur WW.

 

[llperez22]

Watched the doc on Netfix and I'm aware it was shot for entertainment.

I think she did it but the Defence was so good at promoting reasonable doubt, and the prosecution was out of their league. It was Prime Bones Jones vs a local amateur WW.

the doc was based on the first trial. Ive heard the prosecution has stepped its game way up in the second trial currently ongoing.

 

[Thrawn33]

the doc was based on the first trial. Ive heard the prosecution has stepped its game way up in the second trial currently ongoing.

For their sake I hope so, I'd be embarrassed after the first one

 

[Fuzzybabyducks]

Not guilty they found

 

[syct23]

Not guilty they found

Yoda?

 

[Confucamus]

Finally this shit show is over. Glad she's free. There was no way you could find her guilty of this.

 

[Koro_11]

I wanna say not guilty but…

 

[Fuzzybabyducks]

Yoda?

Yeah I don’t know what happened there … as soon as I sent it I was like, that’s a weird way to say it.., but didn’t feel like editing it because it would take too long, but writing this took a lot longer than an easy edit … so I’m not sure what I’m doing .

 

[Fury]

I wanna say not guilty but…

Just say, not proven guilty

 

[syct23]

Yeah I don’t know what happened there … as soon as I sent it I was like, that’s a weird way to say it.., but didn’t feel like editing it because it would take too long, but writing this took a lot longer than an easy edit … so I’m not sure what I’m doing .

Learned experience my friend…

*clinks glass