The lawyer will advise a client not to testify if they believe it’s not necessary, or if it will do more damage than good. Sure, she has the right to testify-but she’ll take the advice of her lawyers first, which is smart on her part. So in a sense, it is up to her lawyers. PR move? Oh stop.
She didn’t mean that it wasn’t her decision. She said she’d defer to her attorneys who are more qualified to determine whether she should or not. She is smart enough to know they know better than
@@SmcdMcd-d2k exactly, there is no way she put a 3 inch deep gash in his rear head, gave numerous skull fractures, and tore up his right arm with a taillight. The dog in the house had a bite history. He was beaten in that house and sadly, house was not investigated with luminal to see any blood in that basement before floor replaced. House then sold. Dog rehomed. Everyone’s cell tel traded in day before warrants….they were tipped off.
She wanted John to give her "more" attention. According to her text to Higginsm she doesn't really like kids. IMO, she was trying to get into the good graces of John's family & friends. This was the main reason she took care of the kids.
I believe she hugs a lot of people and I can’t believe people are standing up for her she thinks she entitled I think she should have been sitting in jail.
I understand what she means by saying it’s up to her lawyers if they’ll put her up on the stand-because she’s smart enough to take their expert advice. Sure, she can go against their wishes, but she trusts them and will follow what they deem is best.
its HER decision not her lawyers, she can loud mouth on the courthouse steps however the coward chose not to testify, to the jury where it counts, she's not innocent
@@AM.000 yes, she would have a very hard time on the stand so she definitely should not testify. The decision is actually up to her. She was making it seem like it’s up to attorneys.
But it is essentially up to attorneys. You're paying them for expertise. If they said "definitely testify" then she would likely do it even if it felt wrong.
She’s not going to testify but she had to run to the media and make it look like it’s going to be her lawyers’ decision when she doesn’t take the stand. OP is spot on. This was pure manipulation.
@@Arlo360-Official no, not 50. Just a few. The blue line, protecting procture. The others are just testifying to the evidence procture gave them. They're just dupes.😊
@paulaheckman9928 That’s what you fail to understand. The cover up can't be just a few people. It has to be massive for everything to be covered up the way you people think it's covered up. And the bigger it gets, the more preposterous it looks.
@@sandrah0330yes she backed up and hit John's car which is on video. In the same video you can see her hit the breaks. You can clearly see it's entirely red. If 47 pieces were missing it would have looked like a cop's flashlight coming out of the back of her car. One of the few honest officers stated he saw it cracked and not in 47 pieces. When the defense presents its case will you come back tell us more about her being guilty 🙄🤡
I agree with Karen I cannot believe they even brought this case, it has all the Hallmark's of a head job trying to cover up for the cops who actually killed her boyfriend
Proctor, the McCabes, the Alberts, and nasty old Huggins committed perjury on the stand and changed their testimony over and over. Not to mention they all had amnesia 😂 plus she doesn’t need to prove anything to the like ten people who don’t believe her.
Apart from the fact you didn't spell "I'll" correctly, you're missing the fact that "I'll" is short form of "I will" So your own argument I validates itself with correct spelling and understanding of the words being used. I'm glad you're not her Attorney.
@jovialpunch Pulling someone up for their grammar and then having a typo in your snooty reply is hilarious. What she said makes perfect sense, with or without the missing apostrophe. "I will defer to my lawyers" (about testifying) "Not that she will" (testify) You're welcome.
Please get up there and testify. No case against you, with accusations as harsh as "they planted tail light pieces" you now have taken on some burden of proof. No planted evidence means you did it! plain and simple. God I hate her and hope she has to answer for her drunken out of control, drinking with medications that dont mix w alcohol, running people over blacked out behavior.
Cops plant evidence to make convictions easier. The problem is that they didn't realize there was video evidence and witnesses that only saw a crack in her taillight vs it being completely broken. She doesn't need to say a word, when the videos provide proof that you could still see the headlight in the morning and in the afternoon after his death.
No way Jackson is putting her on the stand. She is not calm, cool and collected. Terrible prosecution, even if she did it. She will walk and sue Canton! I fear John O'Keefe's death will never be solved 😢
have you watched the trial the only thing they have proved is John O keefe died. There is still no evidence that shows she is the person that did it. The prosecution is spending more time on the google search of Jen Mc Cabe. That dog Chloe was involved in something here.
She doesn’t need to take the stand for state left room for reasonable doubt. But, I get it. She is not hiding anything and not shy to testify to her innocents. I wouldn’t be afraid to testify if I was framed either.
Let her is no like Laly can handle her. Weakest case ever. One month. Of texts and Aruba how many drinks she is right everything personal nothing about what happened Because they don't have anything
I THINK SHE GUILTY a jealous woman who knew her relationship was ending .. she's a ' fatal ' side note: 1. the way she went off on the God daughter in Aruba, very telling huge red flag. 2. Searching for missing officer, there he is there he is! In snow-covered road no one else could see? 3.I think i hit him with my car!!! 4. The barage of texts & calls I'm a 24-hour period harassing the poor guy. 5. How long to die search 6am & more 2nd: Note: I had a friend who was hit by a car going 5 miles faster then the defendant he was a total wreck his head was swollen like a watermelon. Bruises & broken bones, everywhere miracle he survived
Red solo cups. No blood on her car. No attempt to identify the other dna in blood on John's clothing. Amateur accident reconstruction. Multiple witnesses stating a "cracked" tail light opposed to the obliterated one we see. No photos taken immediately upon seizure of SUV. Statements of witnesses evolving across testimony. Butt dials. Rehomed dog. Rehomed phones. Rehomed home. Michael Proctor. Could go on and on really. The prosecution haven't produced, and they are almost finished, a shred of evidence that proves her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Not guilty.
He was on top Of the snow. Yet all the people in the house saw her suv leaving that night, but no one witnessed her hit John?! Yeah, sure. Butt calls all over damn place, strange Higgins at police station in the early hours after a funeral in NY and late night drinking, destroyed phones, Library camera footage missing, sally port footage missing, inverted video presented in court, the 2:27 a.m. search-“hos long to die in cold.” And so much more, way too much to list! Those are dog bites on Johns arm, that’s why they sold their home of many years and got rid of Chloe. They have no evidence against Karen Reed! The non corrupt cop from the city nearby, said her tail was cracked, not shattered. Being upset does not equal murder! You want to lock her up because you are a toxic crime junkie who gets high from seeing innocent people locked up.
@@whatdoyoulivefor735there’s quite a bit of reasonable doubt. To say their case is airtight and the prosecution has proven their case against her 100%…is strange to me. And the defense has yet to even present their side yet.
you re desperate !!! 🤣🤣🤣 have you seen how many lies these clown prosecutors witness have spwed UNDER OAT And you re worried about Karen Read !!!mind blowing , go back to the basement you escaped from 👀
That is so stupid to do, they HAVE TO PROVE the case, she doesn't have to DISPROVE, and one juror was excused because she said she didn't like her, more like, I can't stand ya, type feeling and she could do that to the rest of them if she testifies. She's not a likeable person, but the State has to prove how vicious she really is.
Mat truth be revealed. We sure don't want to die in our sins. We've all sinned and fallen short. But repentance is a worthwhile goal. GOD is love and He loves justice.
The cops are dirty and the state has proven ZERO. But she should stop smiling in court and looking GUILTY AS HELL. I have to keep telling myself to not judge this case based on how she acts during this trial. If i was her defense team i would recommend that she atops puckering her NO LIPS and smiling and just out right looking guilty
Think of how many times this biased judge railroaded other cases.. she needs to step down after this… she needs investigated but I also read she can’t be held accountable for anything.. insane
Seriously! Do you really believe the family killed him Karen, shame on her, she backed over him drunk and angry. Period. She’ll get off there’s no critical thinkers any more!
Hit in the arm and thrown 7 - 30 feet? And no bruise? Yeah, right, a car really did hit him. Keep telling yourself that, you being a supposed critical thinker? Blood dripping vertically onto shirt, front and back and randomly, and even lower than the shit too, doesn't happen when you are knocked down.
So Karen wins and sues Canton PD, Mass State Police, Proctor, makes more money from book and Netflix series. Wonder what the chances of her getting hit with a wrongful death civil lawsuit are? Jackson is probably five steps ahead of this….
If she is guilty then just clear up some points for me please How did John not have a single broken bone apart from his skull ? Not 1 rib or hip or even bruising ? Why was all the blood on the front of his hoody not in the ground ? Not because I’m saying she’s innocent these are just 2 points I cannot see how she hit him with car
@@Theworstwitch72Do you understand the difference between being hit by a car and being run over by a car? You’re expecting injuries to cover his entire body from a hit.
An abusive and narcissistic person, who wanted to kill their partner would never ask, “could I have hit him?” This shows that she’s a caring person. If you’ve watched the full trial and have come to the conclusion of guilt, you are not a decent person. You cannot lock people away for the rest of their life with the lack of evidence in this case and so many questions!
She won't testify. I think she is probably innocent but she smirks a lot in court and in the text's she comes across as very needy and high maintenance
It must be tough to not testify in a case like this especially when you have something to say to all involved. I'd be the same way, sometimes best to be silent.
She didn't do it and even if some say she did it wasn't murder. This is an overcharged case. She is not compelled to testify let the state prove their case. I don't think they can.
It’s not “up to the attorneys”, Karen - if you are innocent you would be ‘chomping at the bit’ to get on the stand and testify your innocence. How easy would that be! If you really are “factually innocent”, your highly paid attorneys will understand you can’t wait to personally testify. Or may be you don’t really want to. Justice for Officer John O’Keefe ⚖️💔
@@BrokebutCreative Repeating yourself, or the contrived conspiracy, doesn’t alter simple EVIDENCE ⚖️ …. (Ok so you edited your comment about repeating yourself 👍🏼)
The evidence of...? What evidence says guilt? And hey, when she's walking free because the CW put on a shit case, it will be the CWs fault. Mrs. McCabe amd the Albert's are going to be spending a lot on attorneys soon and I'm here for it.
@@BrokebutCreative Direct (including forensic) & circumstantial evidence, which not only proves KR’s guilt but totally exonerates Jen McCabe’s so called 2:27 web search. That analysis perfectly matches JMcC’s testimony about her tel. use in the early hours before KR rang her to commence her cover story. (Consequently, not that an answer to this Q. is now needed but: “what are the odds of JMcC googling exactly the same worded Q. at 2:37 as that Karen Read asked her to Google for her at 6:23?” - that would mean KR is also in on the conspiracy to frame herself 🙂↔️) … The data from the Lexus Infotainment Centre is absolutely damning - even though there had been an attempt to stop it being retrieved (?! KR’s brother works for Lexus for those who like conspiracies ….) delaying the analysis for over a year wait for further developed technology to do access the data. She is guilty. However the highly expensive PR & propaganda onslaught (destroying innocent lives & earning big buck donations from much worse off cult-like followers) undertaken by KR & her complicit wealthy immediate family has definitely been successful prior to trial in brainwashing those who can be ‘got at’ & those who choose to financially benefit from social media fame. Justice may still not be served depending on whether jury members have followed all the rules during jury selection & service. I pray it is for John McKeefe & his family 💔⚖️
Do not testify, the jury can see the writing on the wall. No need to waste more of their time on this case that shouldn't have gone to court. Reasonable doubt x 50.
Smart to leave the decision to the attorneys. I think her testiying would be needless and spark a wastseful prolonged the cross examination. It is clear some new trials need to spawn from this case, and not concerning her.
Either guilty or hung Jury. She will face a civil lawsuit and will have to testify. Along with toilet turd, for obstruction of justice and defamation E
Not 100%. Not even 75%. It’s quite reasonable to have doubt in the prosecution’s case. They have failed to prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defense hasn’t even presented their side yet.
I think she would hold her own. But the reality is whenever a defendant takes the stand, they risk shifting the burden with the jury. Things are going her way, and I think it would be best for her to let it be.
I think she would hold her own on the stand. BUT, given the weakness of the evidence, I don’t think she needs to get up there. I am certain her attorneys will advise her not to.
