Like so many others who watched, it was agonizingly obvious that this judge was in the tank for the prosecution. Her contempt for Karen Reads legal team was glaringly obvious. And because of the judge not being interested in clarifying the ridiculous verdict form, she screwed everyone. This judge needs to be removed from the bench
I felt she was 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘺 lenient with the defense most times; often to a fault. She allowed them to explore 3rd Party 𝗶𝗳 it came about organically (it didn't, but AJ ignored that), allowing the "dog bite expert" (small, older woman) to testify despite no notification and needing a voir dire, continually talking over her, whining (especially DY), ignoring her instructions to not repeat certain phrases and to not make statements ( "𝘖𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦," "𝘐'𝘮 𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺," "𝘚𝘩𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶," etc.) Not saying it wasn't much of her own fault to let defense run her courtroom, but boy did they take advantage of it. (Cue: "𝘞𝘦𝘙𝘦 𝘠𝘰𝘜 𝘸𝘈𝘵𝘊𝘩𝘐𝘯𝘎 𝘵𝘏𝘦 𝘚𝘢𝘔𝘦 𝘛𝘳𝘐𝘢𝘓 𝘢𝘚 𝘶𝘚?!" 🥱)
@@EC-dz3fb she had no control of that courtroom, Jacksoita n wanted to run the show and she let him, she allowed the crazy people harass the jurors, this one lady RIita would yell and scream at them, I believe they were scared to sauy guilty they heard what they did to jen nccabes daughter, they are sick people. We need another judge for the next trial and sequester the jury make them feel safe.
She actually restricted the defense in regards to the third party theory. They legally have the right to use it but she didn't allow them to point fingers in their opening argument. While she did allow "the small older woman's testimony" there is much legal precedent to back it up. If she didn't allow it the judge ran the risk of creating another reason for the defense to appeal the case. Besides that "old woman" had more experience then anything the prosecution put out there.
@@user-ii2uh1xq7b Obviously, your education was obtained from television sitcoms. The Judge deliberately gave the jurors forms that were confusing. That was on purpose to get her convicted but it didn't work because Jackson caught it.
@@user-ii2uh1xq7bare you for real!!!!!! Did Allen Jackson ask for “ Not Guilty” options to be added to each count and then Judge Bev denied that request???? What trail did you watch? how did you miss that part about how Judge Bev said “NO” we dont do it that way around here. Bro. You need to pay better attention before speaking
Bev (sorry, I cannot bring myself to call her Judge) made the verdict slips and her instructions as confusing as possible because she was looking for 1 of 2 possible outcomes (Guilty on all or at least guilty of SOMETHING). When she knew that wasn't likely happening she changed gears and called a mistrial. The foreperson, hand picked by Bev, did not run the final note to the judge by the other jurors because he was on side with Bev. His note made it sound like there was a wide divide on all the charges. No other explanation, except that the blue wall will stick together no matter what. The DA's whiplash announcement of a retrial seems both unusual and unwise. With so many possibilities on how to handle the case moving forward, a prudent DA would take at least a moment to consider the options... but not this DA. I've taken more time deciding which flavour of ice cream to order than this DA took announcing a retrial. He's looking pretty silly now after Proctor got suspended without pay as well as Kevin Albert (with pay??). Now the jurors coming out of the woodwork (Bev will need some extra glasses of wine tonight, I think). Super curious what her call will be on the new motions. I want to see the DA double down on the retrial now.
If you wanna see how KR trial outcome should've been watch "Tennessee vs David swift" case about a month ago same exact jury outcome but judge handled it PROPERLY!!!
Words Ethics is a mystery to Judge Bev and Trooper proctor, as much as word Science is a mystery to Prosecution Accident Reconstruction guy Paul - even after he took few courses.
@@bethmccrae2714 You mean .. how mysteriously Proctor kept finding Pieces of Tail light weeks after John O keef was found on the lawn.. and after Canton Police did not find any , any at all, pieces of Tail light on the lawn.. but Mysteriously .. the tail light pieces were Revealing themselves to Proctor and to the ex chief of police, the same Chief of Police that .. did not submit his Security video even though he lives across from Brian Albert and his lawn where John O keefe was found.
@@bethmccrae2714 Yes, and it's a mystery to the rest of us how Proctor got his job in the first place. He is completely unqualified to investigate anything. He doesn't even know how to log evidence. He thought he could keep going out to the crime scene, undocumented, and plant more evidence without anyone questioning it. The man's head must be empty.
@@MoonCrone902 many of the police departments relevant to this case leave plenty to be desired…I just think it’s worth noting rather than just taking on a “all police are corrupt” mindset. Our distrust, frustration, and anger is most effective when not misdirected. I know tone is difficult to interpret in comments, but I wasn’t being sassy or trying to “correct” you lol
It is Proctors own fault!!!! He told family members and highschool friends about her medical issues!! A total HIPPA violation... Unprofessional as a non bias member of law enforcement to share details of the investigation too!!!!
what medical condition? her fake MS? if so she shouldn't be drinking, and when ir comes to HIPPA doubt that will roll because she told everyone, I think ts a lie
@@user-ii2uh1xq7b She had several medical conditions, Proctor has no right to disclose them to friends and family! If Karen Read tells people that's different. He gets what he deserves
@@kellycurran4608 𝗡𝗼𝘁 saying (nor even implying) it was okay for Trpr. Proctor to disclose KR's medical stuff, but it's quite a common misconception that 𝗛𝗜𝗣𝗔𝗔 (𝗛ealth 𝗜nsurance 𝗣ortability and 𝗔ccountability 𝗔ct) protects everyone in all situations. It does not, unfortunately, apply to criminal investigations, including impaired driving cases.
@@user-ii2uh1xq7b Poll the jury* and as soon as she didn't ask for objections to declaring a mistrial and then declared a mistrial it was over. The fact also is that 99.9% of the time the judge usually polls the jury before declaring a mistral, which shows her being a bad judge that much more.
@@Nielak-dg8nj i think shes a bad judge too. She had no control of that court room.she let jackson get away with bloody murder and let the mob harass jurors like that loud mouth Rita lady
I think that’s exactly what they are waiting for. The whole point of the July 22 court date is to discuss the retrial. The judge , prosecution and the defense will decide where to go from here. The Commonwealth will announce the charges that they will bring against Karen, the defense will get a chance to argue it ( I’m assuming ) , and the judge will probably talk about a new trial date and discuss jury selection.
Humans are very limited in looking at the whole story... One question that people have not asked... Kate Read made 53 calls to John O’Keefe after she dropped him off and when he did not reply she was frantic and so then frantically contacted persons who were at the post drinks party... clearly she knew, or suspected she struck the deceased with her car and was frantic about this thought so rather than going back to the site of the potential crime scene she ran in circles until morning when she contacted a guest at that party, Jen McCabe, clearly to gather some information on whether the deceased had been seen and soliciting another person to support her in the event she had struck snd killed him ...
Well according to them…his suspension IS based on the text messages he sent that were read out during his testimony. Up to you if you want to believe them.
On CBS Boston, Legal Analyst Jennifer Roman just said that the judge CAN DECLARE A MISTRIAL if the jury isn't unanimous ON ALL 3 CHARGES. Goes on to say the Defense can't pick and choose, whatever that means. She said that the motion is just a strategy to put pressure on the commonwealth to drop the charges and not try the case again. I didn't think it was an all or nothing instruction to the jury. Jury is unanimous NOT GUILTY on 2 charges and hung on 1 charge. THE JUDGE CAN DECLARE A MISTRIAL AND THE DEFENDANT CAN BE RE-TRIED ON ALL 3 CHARGES ? ? ?
I don't see how this makes sense. The jury did not make a verdict so how can all of a sudden their non-decision be counted? It wasn't counted. So how can it be double jeopardy? There was no legal ruling.
They have had time to speak to witnesses and witness intimidators. They have had time to have been offered money. This has to be decided in the courtroom. Not, a week later give me a break. These attorneys were smart enough to go ahead with the mistrial? and not ask these questions? These defense attorneys are horrible.
her acountability is needed to be proved by a fair and unbiased investigation. Which it was not in this case by all means. Nobody should be found guilty based on the investigation that was demonstrated by the Mass police. Just the fact alone that Proctor was assigned to lead this case since Canton police had to exclude itself from the investigation BUT still Proctor ended up actually having ties with the Alberts and either hid that info or specifically was chosen by "the boys" to accommodate to the Alberts requests, is outrageous. That's why there were so many things that were done wrong here, one mistake by another. Cuz he did not care to actually investigate. And "the evidence" is either inconclusive or weak at best. Only thing that they have is witnesses but there is also an evidence of those “boston cop” witnesses being in a weird collaboration with the investigation, getting classified info and other extras from them. This case should have been investigated by entire different agency. And there is no way this is how we should be prosecuted by a fair justice.
Even though she's not responsible for the death of John O'Keefe???? You still want her to be held responsible? You're as bad as Lally and the rest of the corrupt aholes.....
The evidence in this case shows no suggestion of planting evidence. It's clear the majority of the jurors feel the same. Round 2 coming up likely will view Karen Read is the for the death of John OKeefe.
