How can Dan Abrams say its a tough/tricky case? If Karen did not go back to where she dropped John off that night, who would have been on the hook? I think the inverted video that was submitted by the State from the police department should have been grounds for a mistrail.
Medical examiner could not state a car hit JOK. 2 other experts said JOK’s injuries are not consistent with a car. Proctor and Canton PD owe the Okeif family an apology. I would never live in that state. Not when their police force shows signs of corruption. Nope.
Whoever has been watching this circus from day one has to agree there's no case here. She's being framed who knows why and so the verdict will have to be NOT GUILTY. There's no other alternative here for those jurors if they're to be fair. Otherwise their conscience will traumatize them for as long as they live so I trust they'll do what's right and FREE Karen Read. Justice for John O'Keefe.
Dan is great but maybe needs to watch the whole trial… Since when do the Feds give the defense 3000 pages of docs the help in their defense against the state… a little hint
Not Guilty ❤ and never should have went to trial with the corrupt cops and set up! And Pauls family is trash! The nerve of Paul to smart something off to Karen on his way out...how dare he!!!!
John's family knows ....it's very sad when you know your child's peers covered SOMETHING up, if not anything else, but investigating it so contrary to protocol. My bet is, John would have done a better investigation for them than they did them.
The fact that people keep saying, "We have to keep the victim in mind" means they are never really keeping the victim in mind and that is why they have to say it. Let's face that fact, first. Plenty of evidence of guilt if you do what you are suppose to do and weigh the circumstantial evidence collectively. The trial showed the pieces, but a jury has to put them together and some folks just can't or don't want to do that.
@@lynmarie1786 Nah, I don't care to give autographs to the supporters of truly genuine "Karens''. THIS Karen went above & beyond the arrogant, bitchy ones in stores, businesses and parking lots. She took it to the worst level, actually causing a man to die.
@@melaniel7121she is a victim of corruption! Don’t be so foolish and deny physics and science in general don’t exist, let alone time! It was proven beyond alllll reasonable doubt that a car did not cause those injuries to John and he was not hit by a car! Physics proved that with the same level of certainty that gravity exists! Good grief. Stop being so hateful so someone who is being scapegoated to cover up the real crime! As the corrupt dominoes fall, will you be here still spreading these lies?
I truly believe Karen is guilty. Not because she hit him hard enough to have injured or killed him, or even hit him at all. But BECAUSE SHE LEFT HIM THERE. 1. Slippery ground, slippery shoes, unsteady on his feet because he was drunk, so he fell. 2. He tried to get up, he was on his knees, possibly hit his head on her bumper, or cut it when he fell back down. Did not get up, again. 3. Did Karen actually see him come out from behind her car & walk (20 or 30 feet) to the Arnolds' house? If she did not see him, WHERE did she think he was? 4. I think she checked, panicked when she saw him (DUI & vehicular homicide) and left him there to freeze to death. Or she felt herself back in to him. He was 6', 200 pounds. HOW do you not feel that? She left, pretty sure she hit him, and now it would be leaving the scene added to DUI & vehicular homicide. 5. She told Johns' sister-in-law over the phone "JOHN IS DEAD"! This was BEFORE she, Jen, and Carrie even went to look for him. 6. She DID say "I hit him", not "did I hit him"? 7. She knew right where to go when they were looking for him. Why didn't she just call the Arnolds' & see if he was passed out on the couch? Because she KNEW they would say he was not there. She absolutely knew where he was. 8. She texted/voice-mailed John over and over and over....."WHERE are you" to give herself an alibi. Called her dad three times. 9. NOTHING about John being "beaten to death" in that house UNTIL she was being booked & finger-printed, because she had to come up with another story. 10. For having been beaten to death implies MOTIVE. No motive was established in 8 weeks. NO black eyes on John, no split lip, no bruises all over his face, no cracked ribs, no bloody or cut up knuckles from fighting back, and no broken bones. NO canine DNA. No bloody or torn clothing. 11. She said to Yanetti "I didn't think I hit him that hard". SHE LEFT THAT MAN THERE, KNOWING HE HAD THOSE TWO KIDS AT HOME WHO DEPENDED ON HIM AND LOVED HIM.
Did you not watch the trial?? 1. No experts stated John O'Keefe was hit by a vehicle, much less Karen Read's vehicle. 2. The Prosecution's time line didn't add up with the supporting evidence. At the time they state Karen killed John, Karen was at home signed into John O'Keefe's home internet. 3. The police did NOT have a complete and thorough investigation. They failed to investigate the inside of the Albert's home, failed to consider them suspect. Allowed them to jackhammer their basement floor up, toss it in their inground pool, cover their inground pool up before selling their home below market value, rehomed their dog - which is parts unknown somewhere in Connecticut, rid themselves of their cellphones and move out of the area. 4. There is absolutely no proof Karen Read stated John was dead or she killed him. There is manipulated testimony from Jennifer Mcabe. In all other trials no one stated she said anything of the sort. This was ONLY stated at this trial. 4. Karen Read texted and called repeatedly knowing he never came back out to let her know he was staying or if she could join them inside. She left upset and confused. Drove home... Knowing Brian Higgins was there and there was a chance John would find out about their flirting, she began getting worried, texting and calling. He wouldn't answer nor respond... She kept texting and calling, fuming mad because HIS actions led her to flirt with Higgins. John was a player... The longer it went without a response, the angrier it made her. She left lit messages. She was pissed John never came home... She thought he was at that party getting back at her. 5. There was plenty of motive. Brian Higgins thought he was getting somewhere with Karen until she ghosted him. He saw her that night at the Waterfall, texted her 'Well????' and she ignored him. She chose John O'Keefe over him. How dare she. At the Waterfall, video footage shows Brian Higgins and Albert reenacting a kissing scene, grabbing one another's back sides... Why? Acting the part of Karen and Higgins before announcing Albert's 'Party at my house' where an intoxicated, pissed, jealous Higgins could confront O'Keefe about Karen Read. 6. Thus the group text "Remember THAT GUY never went in the house." O'Keefe went in that house... Higgins told him about him and Karen Read and a confrontation happened that led to the "professional boxer" getting involved. It happened in the basement where John O'Keefe's blood soaked into the concrete, thus needing to be removed. While the fight was happening, Chloe the dog got involved, thinking her master was being harmed. Those men took him out the basement door, through the backyard to the gate, took a few steps and tossed John in the snow, a few feet from the road thinking it would look like a snow-plow hit John... But then a worried Karen Read interjected herself into everything by going and looking for John... Which they used to their benefit - framing her. Thus leading to the text to Proctor "When this is all over we're getting you a nice gift."
Oh dear, what about his niece that was left on her own, was that Karen’s fault too? What about in Aruba when Karen left John and went back to the room where his kids were alone and he didn’t get in til after 3, should she have stayed with him and left the kids then too? Seems like there was only one person actually being responsible to me and that was Karen! John is an adult, did as he pleased and she had no control over that, yet you would like to see an innocent woman sent to prison for life because you don’t like that she left an adult man to attend a party on his own while she went home to his responsibility? There is no evidence she said what you’re saying she said to her lawyer, none. There is no evidence a car hit John and there is no evidence she was there when the prosecutor believed he was hit according to JM’s ever changing testimony. There is evidence that a car did not hit John, there is evidence that Karen was at John’s when she was also supposed to be hitting him and there is evidence of a massive cover up by the police and others! Can’t wait for the dominoes to fall and the birds start chirping their stay out of prison tune!
@@Carryonandlaugh If there was no evidence of John being hit by a car, HOW was there evidence that he was beat to death PLUS attacked by a dog? THERE WAS NOTHING TO INDICATE THERE WAS A BEATING. NOTHING was even intimated about a beating UNTIL Karens' booking & finger-printing. That's convenient. She had to come up with a story. And how do you know the kids were left alone in Aruba? BECAUSE KAREN SAID SO? Of course she never lies, right? ONLY about the death of John O'Keefe. And you're going to say these men were at the bar with their arms around each others' shoulders & posing for pictures, and later one or more of those same men beat John to death? You're so ignorant it's scary.
