Karen Read Murder Trial

[livinitup]

Aug 13, 2024 16:52:18 GMT -5 lostrn said:

This seems pretty damning to me? I don't see another reasonable explanation for microscopic pieces of her tail light to be in his clothing.

The questions comes from the investigation itself where investigators did not photograph the back of KR’s car or the tail light before taking it in as evidence (from her parent’s home) to the local precinct which is unusual and not in keeping with procedure. Still, no photo or video that the tail light was damaged before it was taken by police.
There is video evidence of the car backing into a parked car when KR left her house in the morning (after the death) on way to the scene. It should have already been badly damaged by then and shedding pieces in her garage and driveway and certainly when it hit the other car. But it’s not. It’s not even clear on the video if hitting the other car caused it to crack. The video showed it glowing red and working as a taillight.
As to the theory of the case, can a car leaving a driveway, back into a person and strike them with enough force as to break & shatter the light, into several pieces and transfer tail light pieces into the air and into their clothing while also propelling the person backwards several feet, twirling them mid air (as an explanation as to how the cell phone was under the body), while the force left no injury to the body including no bruises, no bleeding, no broken bones, nor any blunt force trauma, except the pieces (after impact and while the body is travel) was presented as causing a dozen thin parallel scratch marks horizontally on one arm? (That look suspiciously like canine marks and there was a dog in the house where the body was found but the home owner was not interviewed nor was the dog examined, and the home owner just happened to be a local LEO). And the body had no other marks and no skid marks from hitting the gravel or ground. And the tail light pieces with DNA were not found immediately (1/29) upon investigating the area where the body was found nor found by the law enforcement SERT team during the many hours/days they checked and swept the area. The tail light pieces were found after the car (that was not photographed) was in police possession and found by an officer not assigned to the scene (SERT) over freshly fallen snow (bagged and tagged Feb 4th - week later). He independently saw them on the road, collected them, and reported them as found. So, there is no other reasonable explanation of how microscopic pieces of the tail light made it into the victims clothing unless you find it reasonable that someone with access to the car and access to the clothing planted it. So, the question is - is that reasonable?

[mae0111]

Aug 13, 2024 16:52:18 GMT -5 lostrn said:

This seems pretty damning to me? I don't see another reasonable explanation for microscopic pieces of her tail light to be in his clothing.

"The filing reads: “Through trace analysis and forensic testing, the Massachusetts State Police Crime Laboratory discovered the victim’s DNA present on the broken taillight and microscopic pieces of red and clear apparent plastic located in the victim’s clothing. Comparison testing was conducted, and the results demonstrate that the microscopic pieces of red and clear plastic are consistent with the broken pieces of plastic from the defendant’s right rear taillight"

www.google.com/amp/s/www.boston25news.com/news/local/25-investigates-prosecutors-say-taillight-dna-evidence-implicates-karen-read/R263HJ2AWJFIDHSEWQU3WZAB4E/%3foutputType=amp

The DNA present was touch DNA.  JOK and KR basically lived together.  He could have touched the tail light while getting groceries out, closing the trunk, walking by and touching to steady himself or just to squeeze by in the garage, etc.

The "microscopic" pieces were proven NOT to be microscopic, but just small (about 1/16 of an inch).  Since the evidence was handled so poorly throughout this case, I think at one point I heard that the clothing wound up in a bag with the tail light.  The CW couldn't even accurately document the number of tail light pieces in one evidence bag - so when it was opened at trial, the documentation reflected 3 pieces in the bag, and there were in fact 5 pieces... CW witnesses tried to hide that until pressed by the defense to EMPTY the contents of the bag.

More disturbing to me was the presence of THREE DIFFERENT TYPES of blood DNA on JOK's clothing - his blood, and the blood of 2 other unknown parties... which was never investigated... that is a HUGE red flag to me...

[litskispeciality]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there other issues with the car tail light including:

1. The video when KR's SUV was brought in to the crime lab(?) was backwards when played in court. No MSP could justify why the video was inverted, and/or couldn't then confirm it wasn't tampered with.
2. There was 1 hair found on KR's car that made it over 30 miles, in a well documented (by 800 EMS witnesses) snow storm, driving however fast the car was traveling. Just seems suspicious that the one hair remained, but either not several or nothing.
3. From what the local LEO's said there were literal LEAF BLOWERS used at the scene to move snow to look for evidence, so the likely hood pieces of tail light went flying or missing (if they even existed at that time) is highly probable. The LEO's later testified that wasn't the proper form of evidence collection either...
I believe it was also documented that the crime scene wasn't tapped/marked off for several hours to maybe even a day later, which again is a huge issue with evidence collection...especially in such a bad snow storm.

I saw a local weather person who's also a certified forensic meteorologist (I didn't know that was a thing!) give a report on a KR trial review show giving their analysis of the snow fall totals in relation to the timeline given by law enforcement. The meteorologists timeline according to many sources including the local airport not far away, had the snow totals much lower at the time the body was found and transported. I almost wish they had someone like that testify, but honestly it would have been lost in the circus.



My DH had a car towed a few weeks ago and rode with the driver back to our house. Driver was saying they towed a car that was evidence in a local murder trial. Driver had SEVERAL police and other law whatever you call them from crime scene follow the tow truck with the car all the way to the lab to ensure no evidence was lost, tampered with etc. Made me question if the same protocol was followed in the KR case. I don't think anyone asked that, but there were so many witnesses it's hard to remember.

[fluffycookie]

The Dighton police officer testified that the taillight was not broken when he went to take possession of the car.

Also, I find it very hard to believe that the former chief spotted the pieces while driving down the street.  There was one photo that was taken, I think the day he found them and the tail light pieces are on top of packed down snow.

[mae0111]

Judge Cannone denied the motion to dismiss, citing cases that really had nothing at all to do with what happened in this case.

One of the jurors summed it up perfectly: "If they want the truth, they'll ask us. If they don't, they won't."

Not surprising, but pretty disappointing IMO.

[nospaekae]

So it looks like JOK's brother, on behalf of his estate, has filed a civil suit against KR and the bars they were at that night. Will be interesting to see how this is timed with the pretrial- will it be before or after? Will also be interesting to see if anything that wasn't allowed during the first criminal trial is allowed in the civil if if that as any impacts on the retrial.pretrial. I think everyone following saw this coming, but I think the timing is interesting.

[mae0111]

nospaekae, I've read in a few places that they're filing now because there is a 3 year statute of limitations for cases like this, and they'll be bumping up against that timeline at the start of the next trial.

They are relying on the CW's case, but it was so full of holes. There is no proof that she had 9 drinks. The video doesn't prove that she was drinking alcohol. I can't imagine the bars are going to agree that they overserved her and put themselves on the hook. And I would imagine that, whether part of the case or not, Paul OK's history of nearly killing someone when he was OUI (and Karen Read bailed him out) is all going to come out and be front and center in the public eye.

Should be interesting...

[fluffycookie]

A lawyer I was listening too last night said said that the bar for discovery is a lot lower in civil versus criminal so they maybe able to get in stuff that was not allowed in the criminal trial. It will be interesting because the filing claims she was visibly drunk, but no one testified to that. They all testified that she seemed fine.

[litskispeciality]

Aug 27, 2024 12:12:57 GMT -5 fluffycookie said:

A lawyer I was listening too last night said said that the bar for discovery is a lot lower in civil versus criminal so they maybe able to get in stuff that was not allowed in the criminal trial. It will be interesting because the filing claims she was visibly drunk, but no one testified to that. They all testified that she seemed fine.

I also heard another take on the civil suit wondering how they prove how much she had to drink. Even with video of her accepting glasses with liquid, there's no way to confirm that they had alcohol in them, or how much? Any of the clear liquids could have been water, seltzer or tonic water etc. I 200% understand the liability for the bars if they're overserving customers, but then can someone testify that she came in visibly drunk from the last bar? Did either bar (as I think they're both getting sued) have a limit on how many drinks they can serve? How do they normally prove a customer was overserved in similar cases? I thought most of the recaps of the case have also indicated it's unclear how many KR consumed, vs. how many she picked up and handed out to the huge group at the bar...

I thought there were issues with getting her blood alcohol levels at the hospital too? But maybe that wasn't explored/testified in court as I think it wasn't favorable to the CW. I can't remember where I heard that. Also the other obvious factor is if she was drinking at 12 AM and tested at 6 AM her BA level would be significantly different.

PLUS if there were that many LEO's at the bar (documented in the trial), why did none of them try to stop her from driving home, or cut her off etc.? Regardless if they're off duty it seems they should say "hey KR, you're a tiny person and have had 3 G&T's, why don't I call you an Uber and we'll grab your car in the morning, or whatever it's safe to do so due to the impending storm". Should she refuse the help then it's on her...I think everyone who blames KR should take in to account how many other people "let this happen" if she truly was drunk and did it.

A former AG was commenting on the civil case and said it can take 4 - 6 years to process due to courts being backed up, so I'm interested to see if anything can happen with this before the next re-trial in Jan '25?

[AAM2012]

Aug 27, 2024 12:12:57 GMT -5 fluffycookie said:

A lawyer I was listening too last night said said that the bar for discovery is a lot lower in civil versus criminal so they maybe able to get in stuff that was not allowed in the criminal trial. It will be interesting because the filing claims she was visibly drunk, but no one testified to that. They all testified that she seemed fine.

I think you might have meant the bar for an award ($) verdict is lower in civil versus criminal cases, which is generally correct.

There’s typically no monetary amount owed in a criminal case except for restitution, whereas a civil case can seek payment for medical bills, pain and suffering, earnings for the expected life of the victim, punitive damages, etc.

Many civil cases settle $ prior to actual trial to avoid expense, risk, etc. My guess, especially given the holes in the case is that this would settle before trial.

[nospaekae]

I'm curious about two things with the civil suit:

1. Why didn't the O'Keefe family include the Alberts in the suit? I mean, he was found on their property. Usually it seems like lawyers include everyone possible in these suits to see who will pay out. Seems pretty obvious that the homeowner should have been sued as well.

2. I'm not sure how KR's defense caused "emotional distress through false narrative." Her defense didn't include anything about the O'Keefe family. It's not like she defamed them or claimed anything about the family in her defense. How do they prove/disprove false narrative?

[carmenere]

Aug 27, 2024 22:27:41 GMT -5 AAM2012 said:

Aug 27, 2024 12:12:57 GMT -5 fluffycookie said:

A lawyer I was listening too last night said said that the bar for discovery is a lot lower in civil versus criminal so they maybe able to get in stuff that was not allowed in the criminal trial. It will be interesting because the filing claims she was visibly drunk, but no one testified to that. They all testified that she seemed fine.

I think you might have meant the bar for an award ($) verdict is lower in civil versus criminal cases, which is generally correct.

There’s typically no monetary amount owed in a criminal case except for restitution, whereas a civil case can seek payment for medical bills, pain and suffering, earnings for the expected life of the victim, punitive damages, etc.

Many civil cases settle $ prior to actual trial to avoid expense, risk, etc. My guess, especially given the holes in the case is that this would settle before trial.

While you’re correct, I think PP meant what she said (although I’ll let her speak for herself.)

Many of the constitutional protections that limit search and seizure in a criminal investigation don’t apply to discovery in a civil case. The parties have more latitude in what documentation they can compel the other side to turn over. So if the plaintiffs request, say, all of Karen’s communications regarding Turtleboy as part of discovery, the defense likely couldn’t fight it. I expect some very interesting stuff will come out, as if this case wasn’t crazy enough already.

[fluffycookie]

Aug 28, 2024 10:13:19 GMT -5 carmenere said:

Aug 27, 2024 22:27:41 GMT -5 AAM2012 said:

I think you might have meant the bar for an award ($) verdict is lower in civil versus criminal cases, which is generally correct.

There’s typically no monetary amount owed in a criminal case except for restitution, whereas a civil case can seek payment for medical bills, pain and suffering, earnings for the expected life of the victim, punitive damages, etc.

Many civil cases settle $ prior to actual trial to avoid expense, risk, etc. My guess, especially given the holes in the case is that this would settle before trial.

While you’re correct, I think PP meant what she said (although I’ll let her speak for herself.)

Many of the constitutional protections that limit search and seizure in a criminal investigation don’t apply to discovery in a civil case. The parties have more latitude in what documentation they can compel the other side to turn over. So if the plaintiffs request, say, all of Karen’s communications regarding Turtleboy as part of discovery, the defense likely couldn’t fight it. I expect some very interesting stuff will come out, as if this case wasn’t crazy enough already.

This is what the local lawyers are saying -that the bar for discovery is a lot lower.  Also given the holes in the case I would expect the restaurants to fight it.  The bartenders and everyone with her testified that she was not visibly drunk.  

[nospaekae]

KR-adjacent, but there was an indictment in the Sandra Birchmore case today if anyone has been following that. Horrible case.

[litskispeciality]

Aug 28, 2024 12:09:08 GMT -5 fluffycookie said:

Aug 28, 2024 10:13:19 GMT -5 carmenere said:

While you’re correct, I think PP meant what she said (although I’ll let her speak for herself.)

Many of the constitutional protections that limit search and seizure in a criminal investigation don’t apply to discovery in a civil case. The parties have more latitude in what documentation they can compel the other side to turn over. So if the plaintiffs request, say, all of Karen’s communications regarding Turtleboy as part of discovery, the defense likely couldn’t fight it. I expect some very interesting stuff will come out, as if this case wasn’t crazy enough already.

This is what the local lawyers are saying -that the bar for discovery is a lot lower.  Also given the holes in the case I would expect the restaurants to fight it.  The bartenders and everyone with her testified that she was not visibly drunk.  

I expect the bars to fight it too. Again just ALLLL of the videos they've shown on the local news, in the trial etc. that didn't show KR even taking one sip, but maybe I missed it? Were the bars ever questioned when all of the investigation(s) were going on if law enforcement had concerns about a drunk driving accident if this is where the alleged perpetrator was drinking? Shouldn't that be part of standard procedure?

I didn't even think about the OK family not including the A's in the civil suit, but yes that should absolutely happen as it happened at their house. This shouldn't have happened, JOK should still be here, but why are the "KR did it" folks acting like the A's have no liability? They didn't hear the accident happen OUTSIDE OF THEIR HOUSE? I know it was dark, but not one person saw him fly 24 feet and land somewhere else? They didn't question if JOK went home, I mean maybe it was a big party so they could have missed it...but I typically care to make sure my drunk friends either sleep over, or text me when they get home. Plus the family was questioned on the stand how they didn't hear all of the commotion when first responders got there, and how the dog wasn't going nuts (although there are conspiracy theories around the dog.)

Still don't totally understand how the A's haven't had any charges brought against them other than they're a well connected family in the town where this happened. As we've all said many times this whole thing would have gone a different way if the A's and JOK were in a different profession.

Don't want to give TB any clicks, but I'm curious what could be pulled from him that could actually be used in a case? I thought KR was allegedly feeding him rumors to try to get another side of the story out, but did he find anything credible? I'm aware TB's up for many charges including witness harassment, so that could probably further complicate this. 

Not trying to be fresh, but how can this case settle out of court unless KR then takes some kind of deal, which given she seems to be up for paying for another expensive, lengthy criminal trial, doesn't seem to be likely. I highly doubt she'll settle on a civil suit unless it's to dismiss because there's no grounds.

[mae0111]

Aug 28, 2024 13:25:13 GMT -5 nospaekae said:

KR-adjacent, but there was an indictment in the Sandra Birchmore case today if anyone has been following that. Horrible case.

This is going to have an impact on KR, in my opinion. Lots of overlap with the different MSP and local cops. In particular, the MSP cell phone expert Guarino, who said that Jen McCabe didn’t delete the 227 search. He also missed 32,500 texts between Sandra Birchmore and Farwell. THIRTY TWO THOUSAND texts - he said they didn’t exist.

So the CW’s key witnesses for Read are all either inept, or criminals, or both.

[litskispeciality]

@@@ TW

I missed a lot of the Sandra Birchmore case, however thinking back I don't think it got a lot of attention. After all of this KR stuff I think that was completely intentional, which is disgusting, and unfair. She was underage for most of this, and met these guys in a police explorers program to learn about being a LEO FFS! The little I've been able to stomach the guy is deplorable. One report alleges that the alleged murder allegedly murdered poor Sandra, and then his poor wife had a kid less than 24 hours later. That's literal sociopath stuff. I think and hope that he's up for at least double murder, along with child abuse and all that goes along with what happened to her in her younger days.

Her poor family too hasn't been able to speak out due to on-going civil litigation. What a mind-eff to go from a death ruled a suicide that had a lot of clues it wasn't, to it really was murder after a couple of years, ugh those poor people.

Part of me wants to listen to a podcast (I don't know the name, I'll report back) I heard about on the radio this morning as it sounds like there may be some names we know from the KR case, but again this is hard to stomach. I have to wonder if Proctor has anything to do with this too, as I'm sure he does.

I know there are processes and investigations etc., but how are the other 2 (or more?) LEO's not up on charges (yet)? The FBI press conference said they couldn't comment. I truly hope the MSP and all of these police depts are forced to undergo major investigations and staffing changes.

[litskispeciality]

Regarding KR case, I've been listening/watching a lot of Emily D. Baker during the trial and now follow up stories. She's done a deeper dive in to the civil suit(s) and a little more of how they may work (she's a former prosecutor.) Warning there are some new things I didn't know that KR allegedly said to the niece www.youtube.com/watch?v=NimCmMVTbfE.

Poor JOK's niece and nephew. I'm glad they weren't shown during the trial, but I feel like their lives will be ruined forever. The link above explains a little more about funds for the kids, but just so sad that they can't just move on and grieve in private.

[fluffycookie]

Aug 29, 2024 8:37:12 GMT -5 litskispeciality said:

@@@ TW

I missed a lot of the Sandra Birchmore case, however thinking back I don't think it got a lot of attention. After all of this KR stuff I think that was completely intentional, which is disgusting, and unfair. She was underage for most of this, and met these guys in a police explorers program to learn about being a LEO FFS! The little I've been able to stomach the guy is deplorable. One report alleges that the alleged murder allegedly murdered poor Sandra, and then his poor wife had a kid less than 24 hours later. That's literal sociopath stuff. I think and hope that he's up for at least double murder, along with child abuse and all that goes along with what happened to her in her younger days.

Her poor family too hasn't been able to speak out due to on-going civil litigation. What a mind-eff to go from a death ruled a suicide that had a lot of clues it wasn't, to it really was murder after a couple of years, ugh those poor people.

Part of me wants to listen to a podcast (I don't know the name, I'll report back) I heard about on the radio this morning as it sounds like there may be some names we know from the KR case, but again this is hard to stomach. I have to wonder if Proctor has anything to do with this too, as I'm sure he does.

I know there are processes and investigations etc., but how are the other 2 (or more?) LEO's not up on charges (yet)? The FBI press conference said they couldn't comment. I truly hope the MSP and all of these police depts are forced to undergo major investigations and staffing changes.

We are very local and it didn’t get any attention.

[mae0111]

For anyone interested in the Sandra Birchmore case, Kirk Minihane has been covering this for over 2 years. He seemed to have put a lot of the pieces together before anything was released by the AUSA.

If you want to hear his findings from late 2022/early 2023, you can listen to season 2 of The Case by Barstool Sports.

[scm1011]

Aug 29, 2024 21:08:30 GMT -5 fluffycookie said:

Aug 29, 2024 8:37:12 GMT -5 litskispeciality said:

@@@ TW

I missed a lot of the Sandra Birchmore case, however thinking back I don't think it got a lot of attention. After all of this KR stuff I think that was completely intentional, which is disgusting, and unfair. She was underage for most of this, and met these guys in a police explorers program to learn about being a LEO FFS! The little I've been able to stomach the guy is deplorable. One report alleges that the alleged murder allegedly murdered poor Sandra, and then his poor wife had a kid less than 24 hours later. That's literal sociopath stuff. I think and hope that he's up for at least double murder, along with child abuse and all that goes along with what happened to her in her younger days.

Her poor family too hasn't been able to speak out due to on-going civil litigation. What a mind-eff to go from a death ruled a suicide that had a lot of clues it wasn't, to it really was murder after a couple of years, ugh those poor people.

Part of me wants to listen to a podcast (I don't know the name, I'll report back) I heard about on the radio this morning as it sounds like there may be some names we know from the KR case, but again this is hard to stomach. I have to wonder if Proctor has anything to do with this too, as I'm sure he does.

I know there are processes and investigations etc., but how are the other 2 (or more?) LEO's not up on charges (yet)? The FBI press conference said they couldn't comment. I truly hope the MSP and all of these police depts are forced to undergo major investigations and staffing changes.

We are very local and it didn’t get any attention.

Same. I hadn’t heard anything about this case until this week’s Sunday Globe. Mind boggling that this LEO wasn’t charged earlier. So so despicable.

[litskispeciality]

Apparently people have started to protest the Sandra case speaking out against the police and the treatment of this case.

20/20 is covering the KR case this Friday night, however KR was interviewed before the trial. I'll record and watch, but I think it would be more interesting to hear from her after the trial now that more may be out. This won't be the only special covering the case.

[mae0111]

So it's been a week since the Farwell arrest, and at least that long since the feds handed everything over to MSP/Stoughton/Canton police. NO MORE ARRESTS. What are they doing??? The Feds can't indict everyone - they got Farwell on federal witness intimidation charges. They can't indict all of the other officers on rape and conspiracy, right? Those are state/local charges??

[litskispeciality]

Oh I saw the preview for the KR 20/20 and I saw TB for a minute. Uuuugh, I know he's up on a bunch of charges that involve witnesses and he allegedly had a lot of talks with KR, but please please don't give his blog any attention or clicks, please!

[mae0111]

Thoughts on the DA benching Lally in favor of a special prosecutor? I feel like it's a pretty big waste of money...

[litskispeciality]

mae0111, you beat me to it. www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-retrial-hank-brennan/. I'm curious if the Commonwealth will:

1. Add additional resources to the bench since Lally seemed like he (understandably) couldn't keep up with prep and live trial?
2. Ask for an extension as there's a new trial date in Jan '25. Will this new special prosecutor need more time to prepare, or have they been researching and prepping this whole time, hence the switch?
3. How much more does this new prosecutor cost than Lally as this sh!t's getting very expensive for the tax payers (never mind KR.)

I thought in the original trial both sides asked for an extension, but the judge wouldn't approve it. Some feel extra time could have helped ya know, make the case a little stronger (maybe).

Did Lally ask to step down or get extra help? That part hasn't been clear. Why did they pick that specific guy as well? Do they think he'll do a better job, and/or get a conviction?

KR has also appealed to the MA Supreme court as several jury members have come forward saying they would have found her not guilty on 2 counts, but the jury instructions weren't clear. www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-appeals-case-massachusetts-supreme-judicial-court/
From what I've read by legal experts this is a super gray area once the mistrial was declared, and it doesn't seem like every jury member is stepping forward to confirm these thoughts.
Lots of concerns if Judge Bev should have polled the jury prior to declaring a mistrial. Curious if this could delay the new trial as well as you'd hope the higher level court appeal should be reviewed first...right?

Did Proctor ever formally lose his job? I see he was suspended, but I can't remember if he actually was removed from duty. Curious how many people won't have jobs when/if the new trial happens and how that's addressed? One legal expert said they could probably be questioned about it on the stand, so the CW will have to really decide who's a crucial witness as these folks can further hurt the case.

I'm still scratching my head as to why this trial is going to be re-tried but we're still waiting.

[mae0111]

Resurrecting this old thread...

Vanity Fair just released a 2 part series interviewing Karen Read and outlining the case. In my opinion, it's the most thorough and accurate depiction of the events, and it really humanizes Karen Read.

In the 2nd part, she talks about her relationship with Mr. O'Keefe (John Sr). She quoted a Christmas card from him. It was absolutely heartbreaking. He is a kind and gentle man, and all of this must be killing him.

www.vanityfair.com/style/story/karen-read-trial-interview-part-1
www.vanityfair.com/style/story/karen-read-trial-interview-part-2

[bcv513]

This article was fantastic. It really went into all the issues with the police and DA. I didn't realize that the judge's brother had defended the Alberts years ago.

[litskispeciality]

I haven't had a chance to read the Vanity Fair article(s) yet, thank you for sharing! I believe there were concerns that the judge knew at least once of the witnesses, and there was some issue with the judge's beach house rental in relation to someone on the case that happened in pre-trial (not TB blog, really happened in court) but I can't remember now. Anyway, it seems like you really can't find anyone against KR or "neutral (say the way the judge is supposed to be)" that isn't corrupt or biased at this point.

I saw and estimate on the local news that KR's spent close to 5 MILLION dollars so far. Her house is up for sale (sold?) There's some pushback to start the civil lawsuit trial asap where KR would have to testify, but the defense is arguing it can violate her 5th amendment right as she may not testify in the new murder trial if/when it happens. The prosecution is saying that KR is using the media as a platform* to get her story out (she technically is.) I'm not a lawyer and had a hard time in Business Law class, but I think she should be able to speak out but not have to testify. I'm starting to understand that whatever she says can now be used against her, but this is going on for years and years and she needs to defend herself. Curious though if she can make any money off of the press? I think yes because she hasn't been convicted of anything?

The local news also said the VF article may be grounds to have the new trial re-located based on not being able to find a venue with an impartial jury if either side petitions (?) for that. Wasn't that the concern for the last trial though? This was big news well before this article, and the last trial was streamed so pretty much everyone knows and has an opinion...

I've lost count of all of the LEO's and state troopers that've been placed on leave or fired, transferred to a new dept etc. The state of MA had a new chief of State Police sworn in as well. Again I scratch my head why the state still plans to go ahead with another trial as early as Jan '25. I guess we'll see.

Haven't had a chance to watch the KR Dateline yet. I believe that was filmed before, or during the trial.

*20/20, Dateline, this VF article, and she had dinner with some local radio DJ's although they didn't get in to specifics due to the VF article

[bcv513]

litskispeciality, I wouldn't bother with the 20/20 episode. They didn't even touch on some of the major issues with the investigation or the people. They didn't even mention the dog.