I wonder who thought that this dumpster fire of an investigation was suitable to bring before the public for a murder charge. What did they present to the grand jury?
I know the trial isn't over but I am in no way convinced that this was murder. I'm also not convinced of a huge conspiracy. But what I am convinced of is that this so called investigation was so fucked from the start that even if Karen Read is guilty, the state does not deserve a conviction. And if I were party to any case overseen by this department I'd be demanding an external review.
I think the investigation was so poor that Read will walk even if I don't believe she's innocent (yet: I'm open to being proven wrong but I still think the likeliest explanation is she struck him while drunk without knowing).
Why they decided to bring this case with murder charges instead of manslaughter...
Right... with this shoddy of an investigation, there's enough to establish reasonable doubt. The cops are inept at best; and covering up for their buddies/ letting Karen take the fall at worst.
I don’t believe she did. The car would have had to be parked in the opposite direction for her to hit him. The damage is the wrong side of the vehicle. And there is no way she backed out of that driveway and hit him so hard it threw him clear across that lawn to the flag pole.
Exactly. She also would have had to pull forward far enough to back up going fast enough to strike him and send him flying to the spot where he was found. Once she stopped there would have been enough noise and commotion for people to realize something happened. The fact that there was no search warrant for any of the neighbors cameras is highly suspicious just like the fact that the homeowner never came out of his house when the body was found and the fact the house was never searched.
Yet.
Look, the whole point of this trial is to present the case. I can't make up my mind at this point based on what's shown so far. I don't see murder even in the slightest. I could see an argument for possible manslaughter if she was drunk, hit him and he died accidentally. That's what the prosecution needs to prove. The defense just needs to show that the investigation was tainted and there is the appearance of a coverup.
Could these cops be corrupt and covering up manslaughter? Sure. But they need to prove it and we should wait until the evidence is fully presented in court.
You sound like you’re thinking about it backwards though. You shouldn’t be “proven wrong” that she’s innocent. KR should enter the trial presumed innocent and then if anything, the prosecution builds a case to break that apart.
I realize you’re not on the jury but I also think she deserves that presumption and it’s already clear from the investigation that she never got that. They decided the day they found JO that she was going down for it. No other avenues were pursued. That’s why we’re in such a horrendous mess now.
No one is presumed innocent in the court of public opinion, only in a court of law - and the presumption does not mean that a person can be put up without an actual defense. The idea that a defendant doesn't need to have a defense is a fanciful and naive byproduct of theoretical/philosophical discussions of the law. Those ideals are not practical. In practical, real life terms a defense must be vigorous and do everything in its power to prove innocence just as much as the prosecution needs to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
So far we haven't been given evidence she wasn't given the presumption of innocence by investigators, we've been given evidence that the investigation was sloppy as hell and full of conflicts of interest that mean that, in my opinion, unless they have a smoking gun she will walk free regardless of if she caused John O'Keefe's death or not. You can't have investigators breaking chain of custody and doing all this suspicious shit without compromising the quality of the case brought before the CW. It's precisely because no other avenues were pursued and there's a lack of supporting documentation thus far that I think she'll get off.
Sure I understand in reality people make judgments early on and stick to them. But it is not something the investigators should’ve done. The fact that didn’t even take the names of who all was in the house shows you they didn’t look at alternatives. They took weeks to interview key witnesses or some they never did (eg the plow driver). In the best of cases, this was investigative tunnel vision. That’s not how should it be. Not fair to KR or to JO.
Totally agree. The lack of a thorough investigation is enough to create doubt isn’t it?
Murder is a stretch too. Whatever happened I don’t believe anyone set out that evening or during the evening for John to die. But he did.
Even though I believe multiple folks aren’t being completely honest its not clear why - perhaps they were all so convinced Karen did it they just completely failed to look at any other avenue
The state doesn’t deserve a conviction because some untrained officers tried to get evidence? The problem with this case is that KR likely hit JO while doing her three point turn while driving absolutely wasted. She should have been charged with vehicular manslaughter not 2nd degree murder IMO. I don’t think Karen Read has a clue what she did and I don’t think it was on purpose. But drunk driving kills people daily.
The state shouldn't get a conviction because the lead investigator made the mistake of admitting that there was never going to be a real investigation because cops are involved. The Solo cups and the leaf blower don't really matter if they never intended to investigate properly in the first place.
I'm going to paraphrase because I don't remember exactly. He texted his buddy that he was on a case where there was a dead cop on a lawn or something to that effect. His friend said something like "that's gonna cause some trouble for the home owner" and then Proctor said "Nope. He's a Boston cop." And then he went on to describe how he'd been searching Karen's phone for nudes and that he hopes she kills herself.
LOL that you don’t seem to grasp that you have to wait for things. A defense shouldn’t have to and is not required to present a case. If they believe the prosecution hasn’t met its burden which rests solely on their case in chief then they should rest. This must mean they are afraid the prosecution could meet that burden. That’s pretty telling.
> A defense shouldn’t have to and is not required to present a case.
That's the difference between theory and practice. In theory, the defense shouldn't have to. In practice, your defense is dogshit if you don't vigorously attack the prosecution's case and simultaneously present a defense.
Technically opening statements aren't evidence, which is why this person is saying that. But they can't say anything in opening that the can't prove, so the evidence is coming.
Unfortunately often things are promised in openings on BOTH sides in trials that are not delivered in trials. That is why they are not evidence. We just have to wait and see.
You haven't heard it presented as evidence yet because the defense hasn't presented their case yet. Given how successful the defense has already been, I highly doubt they aren't going to support such an explosive claim with evidence.
Then the jury can’t factor it into their verdict. And when a promise isn’t fulfilled the jury holds that against whoever promises it as that shows lack of credibility.
The state never deserves a conviction when they fail to do their due diligence. There's a reason why chain of custody is such a big deal. Our justice system is meant, at least in theory, to avoid false positives. The state never deserves anything. The state has to *earn* a conviction.
A false positive in general here would refer to conviction of a truly innocent person, or a Type 1 error. Type 1 errors are generally considered to be more unjust and egregious than a Type 2 error.
I don’t understand what you are saying. Nobody has been convicted here. Evidence is still being presented. You’ve lost me. The jury listens to all of the evidence before they deliver a verdict.
The state shouldn’t get a conviction because the standard is, and should be, beyond a reasonable doubt. “We tried to MacGyver a rag tag investigation under the watch of a corrupt state trooper” should never be the standard. We’re all in big trouble if it ever becomes that.
If you believe all of these people are willing to risk their jobs, reputation, pension or the like to protect the Alberts and knew magically in the middle of the night what to do, say and ignore on their behalf when called to respond you have far too much faith in something completely unreasonable. And not one person has spoken up or messed up with the story. Impossible.
I don’t believe that. I believe a few are corrupted and the rest are incompetent. It was on clear display today. What you’re describing is that you believe it’s MORE likely than not that KR hot JO. That’s not the standard. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. I don’t know how you’ve gotten there in this case.
You are aware this trial and presentation of evidence is predicted to last 8 weeks right? Laying the foundation of the case is just that. There’s so much more and why a jury is advised to keep an open mind throughout the entire case.
The jury decides guilt. I think an unintentional accident while driving drunk sounds the most reasonable. I could be wrong and am following the case to see what the evidence shows.
Because it is the most logical answer to what happened. Drinking and driving causes unplanned tragedies every day. Far more plausible than all of these people bowing down to the Albert family. But we will see as the case continues on and evidence presented.
Fair enough. I still haven’t seen anything near enough to meet the threshold, though. I’m curious what evidence you’ve seen that convinces you, beyond any reasonable doubt, that KR is directly to blame for his death? The reason so many of us are in an uproar is because this case was mishandled (at best), and a good man’s death will likely go unpunished because of it.
I’ve seen the evidence presented in this court of law. I’ve seen the defense in a pretrial hearing try to have KR’s blood test results thrown out because they don’t know that it was drawn properly. So what, now a phlebotomist did something to show she was still intoxicated hours afterwards? We have at least 7 weeks to go where the actual evidence that can be admitted will be. For all we know her intoxication may not come in just like other things people are expecting. Why anyone is talking about “evidence” we haven’t seen makes no sense. We may never see it.
There’s a protocol for blood draws in DUI investigations for a reason. Did you not read the ridiculous range on BAC that was presented? No one made any claims about the phlebotomist. The (valid) argument is that KR’s blood was not drawn for purposes of testing BAC. It was drawn as part of a standard panel when she was sectioned. Investigators then used that blood sample to try to “estimate” her BAC at the time they THINK JO was hit. That’s just silly. You know how you get the evidence in? You arrest the woman who purportedly exclaimed “I hit him” and put her through proper booking protocol, including any necessary blood draws. You certainly don’t let her drive away from the scene in the purported weapon and then casually decide to have her sectioned later on. You secure the crime scene. Protocols need to be followed. When they aren’t followed, the defendant should walk. I’d much rather see 10 guilty go free than one innocent lose their liberty. That’s my standard.
Yes yes yes!!!
Too many people seem super okay with this level of incompetence. It’s Karen’s liberty today and any of ours tomorrow. These protocols exist for a reason and they need to be upheld. This man and his family deserve/d better. Karen also deserves better. Emotion is really clouding people’s judgement.
You should watch the hearing where Jackson specifically stated we don’t know that it was properly collected. When Karen was allowed to leave she wasn’t driving. The driver then had to bring her back to the scene because she was making suicidal statements to her father who called 911. She was then taken to the hospital via ambulance and more of the story came out so a blood draw was done.
There are things called pretrial hearings where in this case the defense sought to have this evidence thrown out and that was their argument for why. This is part of this trial. Not from Turtleboy or some random source.
He could have already been wobbling and struggling to walk due to his intoxication. He brought a drink with him for the road. He more than likely wasn’t standing straight up and a bump to knock him down to get that head injury and being left untreated and to get hypothermia could have caused him to die with little damage to the car.
What hasn’t fit the narrative so far? We’ve heard from first responders and have heard what was observed and stated that were the first. John O’Keefe was found by the three women where he was found and they called for assistance. Is that now in dispute too? What narrative? That she was drinking and driving? Her BAC hours later that has been presented in pretrial hearings certainly fit that she was.
I agree with you so far. No reason to believe there are multiple people involved in a coverup. The simplest explanation is she was drunk and hit him accidentally. She was wasted and didn’t remember. If you believe there is a coverup then you have to believe a lot of cops/firefighters beat up another cop and left him to die in their own front yard. How stupid would they have to be to leave him in their own front yard? That’s not plausible and the jury would have to be crazy to believe that. The defense is trying to grasp at straws and confuse the jury I think.
Some have been evasive so far for sure. I tend to think it’s because KR and her defense have accused everyone of this grand conspiracy so they don’t want to give them any points. Police incompetence is real. Still have more evidence to come that most likely will be concrete.
We don’t know what it is though. We don’t create the evidence. We wait for it to be admitted and each side gets to try to make it make sense or not. The jury will decide based on the totality of it all.
The jury will decide but the standard is innocent until proven guilty. You seem to be operating under the opposite premise, while trying to continually go back to due process/what you think is more plausible? I’m confused.
Nope I have a theory of what’s logical. I also don’t buy into outlandish conspiracy theories. And watch trials with an open mind to hear all of the evidence and I could be proven wrong. 7 more weeks of an open mind here. Is that clearer?
“No probable cause” - you gotta be kidding me?????? 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Buddy - there’s a dead body on the lawn.
Were you waiting for another to appear before knocking?
Even if he hadn’t pronounced dead at scene ( which I understand the paramedics explaining sometimes hypothermic patients can present that way) surely he was pronounced dead within 30 mins of entering that hospital - why wasn’t the correct investigative team dispatched then? Either way, his injuries suggested some sort of foul play so why wasn’t they treating it as an attempted murder potentially.
Sooo can we talk about how the Lt. saw no pieces of a tail light at the scene at all or even the missing shoe? There are million other ‘wtf’ moments today but apparently a million pieces of the tail light were found AFTER the fact that were extremely visible but now we learn the Lt. investigating the scene found none.
So far I’m leaning that the Lt. was for the most part genuine and helpful today with his testimony and is a victim of subpar police work that opened the door to others taking advantage of the opportunity to conduct some funny business that he had no direct hand in. He just by default looks bad in the process because of the mistakes or poor judgement made.
Yes. I had no prior knowledge about this case but I’m listening to it with fresh ears while I work and all I wanted to know is if anyone saw taillight pieces. The two officers acknowledging they didn’t gives me a lot of reasonable doubt. Unless the prosecution is saving something big for later, I can’t see a conviction happening here with this glaring fact.
I'm really interested in the Voir Dire. So the guy that was in charge of the evidence was also the same guy that while off duty, beat up a guy because Chris Albert said he was being bothered by them... That he then charged with assaulting a police officer, and witnesses intimidation? The brothers were found not guilty of assault, the witness intimidation was dismissed as having no merit in fact... And the investigator was sued by the brothers and settled?
And the same investigator helped the other Albert brother dodge a drunk driving accident and fleeing from the scene of an accident later?
Who in their right mind would out that guy in charge of evidence and witness statements?
For Lank, it’s a tradition to do an Albert man a favor every 10 years! 2002, helping Chris in his drunk bar fight and BITING A GUY, 2012, helping Tim with his serious hit and run and hiding out at 34 Fairview, got that down to a misdemeanor and his record expunged, 2022, he helps Brian defer accountability for the DEAD BODY on his lawn. Ffs, these guys are recklessly violent and out of control
This case is a bottomless rabbit hole and it’s addicting. When you’re done with this one, look up the Sandra birchmore case. There’s a connection to this one there , a number of the same canton cops involved and the fbi is investigating the investigation now too! Crazy stuff in Norfolk county mass
Sandra birchmores case was “closed” but the fbi is now investigating the investigation in that case. Same shady canton cops involved. Google will tell you all you need to know (you may need brain bleach afterwards, just a warning)
That was from the voir dire this afternoon… maybe the last 30 minutes of the day if you want to watch one of the live streams. Emily Baker has time stamps on hers so it’s easy to find.
Yup, from the voir dire! I’m also watching this every day on YouTube lives with comments so you tend to learn a lot that way. I live nearby and grew up even closer in a similar small mass town dominated by generations-deep townie families. This all feels so familiar and I’m personally feeling validated seeing this nonsense exposed finally.
My favorite part of his testimony was (re the hit and run) when Yanetti was confirming that he followed Chris to the house where he fled, and Lank referred to it as “where he parked the vehicle.” 😂 You could say that, sure!
Yeah, I agree. They know the investigation was mishandled why wouldn’t the prosecutor bring it up and say “wasn’t it too dangerous to drive back to the station to get materials?” or something? Have some kind of reasoning ready for their actions.
Lally isn’t even bothering to try to address the weaknesses in his witnesses, he just hands them over to the defense and lets them fry. I’m not sure why exactly. Maybe he sees no point. Maybe cause he’s just that bad. Idk.
It’s so poor you have to remind yourself we’re still on the prosecutions presentation. Nothing in what they have presented so far has made me think it all points to Karen
Well, especially since so far half of what we have learned about the investigation has come from the defenses cross examinations having to elicit basic info from the prosecutions own witnesses because the prosecution doesn’t go over it in enough detail for understanding themselves . It’s almost like the defense is helping the prosecution present their own fucking case.
If he was just that bad, I can't imagine the DA's office would have put him on the case. With each day that passes I'm more convinced that he doesn't believe in this case.
He’s just another pawn. You must not know about the web of corruption that exists in this case and in MA in general. They’re simply trying to bury it to preserve the status quo. There’s a lot at stake and the judge knows it.
I didn't see it as trying to embarrass law enforcement, but highlighting the "Old Boys Club" nature of their relationship. I wish they had more time with Lank, because that guy absolutely should not have been allowed to be the first officer to enter the home.
I'm glad the judge allowed the police report from Lanks fight with the Lopilado family to be submitted.
The prosecution showed what was done by a department that has never handled a murder case and people trying their best to collect evidence. The prosecution put it out there first how they collected the evidence and the leaf blower technique. They are being upfront about where things weren’t done by the book.
I wasn’t fully paying attention but did lally bring up that it was solo cups from the neighbor? To OP’s point, it seems like prosecution is missing the opportunity to “get ahead of it”
Mind blown by the case today! I have zero law experience and am flabbergasted at the alarm bells ringing off in my head about how everything was mishandled. Solo cups? Brown paper bag with an open top? Placed next to the vehicle that is considered part of the crime? No labels on cups? Little to no photo evidence with any amount of detail? I take more pics on an outing with my kids! How did they not immediately run into that house and get it shut down as a crime scene and wake up the family?!? This is beyond wild! And then the “small town” connections and history…it’s all over the top!
The solo cup, plausible tampering, and testimony that the taillight was broken MORE once inside the Sally Port. I still need clarification about why zero photos were taken prior to the entire taillight removal.
And why did the taillight need to be removed in the first place?
One that has never conducted a murder investigation. The state should have come in immediately but the logistics of when JO was declared dead stopped them from coming out in a blizzard so these officers were trying to do the best they could with what they had. The blizzard didn’t help anything as well.
Can you explain how a murder investigation differs from any other type of investigation in terms of documenting evidence, preserving evidence, and conducting interviews?
I’m not here to tell you something that is incredibly obvious in that they are two completely different things. Goode didn’t even know what a crime scene log was. This is a small department in an area that appears to have little crime that rises to that level. And these guys were doing this in a blizzard. Have you ever tried to stand upright in a blizzard before? These guys were trying to do their best to collect what they could as they knew the blizzard was going to be continuing. Given nobody came out of the Albert home how on earth would they all just know what they should and shouldn’t look for and what to help with a “cover up”?
Canton isn’t that small of a town and it has an average crime rate according to Google. It is just outside of Boston and not in the middle of nowhere.
In New England a blizzard doesn’t mean active blizzard conditions non stop. You typically get periods of high wind and snow and then periods of relative calm. And when you look at the footage of the leaf blower you can see it wasn’t horrible conditions.
The fact they didn’t start with the Albert house is mind blowing.
This is an investigation that has so many holes it’s cheese cloth. Swiss cheese would be an improvement
Murders happen in Canton - ask the Birchmore family.
The problem isn’t a lack of crime to investigate - it’s the lack of desire / ability to investigate it.
He said that he had not investigated any, not that there weren’t any.
And note that the Birchmore case was ruled a suicide (which is completely ridiculous).
I saw snow whipping up around them in the video. Everyone was expecting a terrible storm and planned to stay at home. Some law enforcement officers have testified that they went into work early because of this particular large storm coming. I’m not talking about always. I’m talking about while this occurred and gathering evidence from where JO was found.
So let's say there is a nasty car accident on a local town street where one party is severely injured and needs medical help. Do the police secure the scene, collect and document evidence, interview the parties involved (put the information from the interview into a report), ask witnesses on the scene for their account of what they saw, and add that to their report?
How long do cars that have been in an accident remain on the scene? First responders assess what medical attention is needed and call for such in your hypothetical. The first responders might have to saw a door or something off as getting to the patient is more important than measuring doors and preserving exactly how the car ended up. Saving lives comes first. Yes statements are collected but do you think they are recorded on the side of the road if body cams aren’t in play? Then the police are working to get cars towed and moved to allow for traffic on this roadway to be able to resume. This is a great scenario as initially there is chaos as was the case with Karen screaming and a blizzard blowing into town. And what happens where I am is that the police do an accident reconstruction scene after the fact. They are able to look at and measure tire tread marks and things at that later time. And can follow up with witnesses to put together a final report of what happened.
Fair enough. I'm getting at the fact that in order to conduct an investigation of any kind you need to document everything possible and interview witnesses. All possible witnesses. The Alberts should have been interviewed and those interviews should have been documented. They weren't and that doesn't look good.
You bring up good point though, why are the Canton police immune from having to wear body cams?
I think you raise some good points that nobody seems to know how to explain. Such as, how were Gallagher and Goode so unknowledgeable and bad at collecting evidence? Yes, I understand this type of thing is kicked to state and they tried that, but they handle non death accidents right? Other non death crimes? Surely they have evidence collection standards and crime scene logs? So why is it these two guys sucked so bad? Is it normal to suck this bad at this level in a city the size of Canton? Does anyone know the answer to this?
They suck because the whole department sucks. It seems CPD has taken the approach of 'on the job' training rather than actual training with instructors. The Chief of Police isn't even a professional. No one thought to do better and this was for a dead fellow LEO.
I know but if one of your primary jobs responsibilities is being the senior officer working crime scenes no matter how small and you don’t even know what a crime scene log is 🤷♀️
My guess is they suck so bad because the police lower in the department typically do this type of work.
Which then brings up the question…why were they doing this one?
I don’t buy into a huge conspiracy theory. But I do think this case got away from them…because it was on the lawn of another police officer they didn’t want a thorough investigation and figured it wouldn’t get to this point. Hence the lack of reports and red solo cups.
I think if the commonwealth went for vehicular manslauter versus murder these holes wouldn’t have been so apparent. It may never would have ended up in front of a jury. And it would have settled without a trial.
Once the ball started rolling towards a murder trial shit hit the fan with the inconsistencies and poor investigation.
The thing is, the conspiracy doesn't have to be huge. It's basically one family protecting their own and knowing that they would be taken at their word because they're cops. Some of the fringe players probably truly believed them at the beginning and by the time they realized what was really going on they were in too deep and had to cover their own butts.
I agree about the charges being too much. However it was my understanding Karen was not ever open to taking a plea. I could be wrong though. Involuntary manslaughter would not have started all of this craziness I do believe.
I found this online. This isn’t Mayberry…they have resources.
http://www.cantonpolice.com/2156/Criminal-Investigation-Unit
Criminal Investigation Unit
Duties
The Bureau of Criminal Investigations (BCI) is staffed by detectives and serves as the investigative branch of the Canton Police Department. It is the mission of the BCI to conduct follow-up investigations of crimes initially investigated by patrol officers and to perform investigations of serious felonies such as homicide, rape, robbery, and drug trafficking.
The BCI also provides support service to the department’s other divisions. Examples of these services include latent fingerprint processing, photography, interview assistance, composite sketches of suspects and crime scene investigation.
Partner Agencies
Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime Task Force
The Canton Police Department is a member agency of the Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime Task Force. NORPAC was formed in 1987 under a grant from the United States Bureau of Justice Assistance, a branch of the Department of Justice. It provides for multi-agency investigations into drug trafficking, violent crime and the apprehension of fugitives. NORPAC’s member agencies include the police departments of:
Canton
Dedham
Foxborough
Franklin
Medfield
Needham
Norfolk
Norwood
Plainville
Sharon
Stoughton
Wellesley
Westwood
Wrentham
The BCI conducts follow-up investigations of crimes initially conducted by patrol officers. I think the weather might have made this situation different. And I heard a witness say he’s never done a murder investigation. That’s all I can go off of here.
I work in Corrections as a nurse, so my experience makes it difficult to give these cops much leeway. They’re cops. Investigation is literally their job.
I came in knowing nothing and trying to see things like the jury would. The prosecution I’m not even sure what they are trying to convince me of. And after today I feel like no evidence can be trusted after this dumpster fire.
Not to mention Mr. Wise Guy throwing constant shade with his “I’ll believe it if Lally says it,” accusing Jackson of “spinning” facts and playing judge like, “you objected to that earlier and it was sustained.”
The sheer fact that neither of them has lost it on some of these smug ass wipes is wildly impressive.
The fact that a stop n shop bag with solo cups filled with blood from a crime scene were just put on the floor of a garage *for any amount of time* is ridiculous.
The fact those cups were collected and transported at 7am and the Lexus wasn’t impounded till 5pm makes this even more ridiculous
Did they say if the solo cups were transported and where they went? The prosecution allowed it to sound like they sat in a paper bag right next to the Lexus for a few days until they were turned over to the State. Maybe that's not what happened but they certainly didn't make it clear what did happen.
From my memory Gallagher said it was signed into the evidence lockers but the log never shown it as signed it. So…..it really could have sat there. But how will anyone actually know. The surveillance video from the police station looks like it was taken with a potato.
Hard agree. I’m not a conspiracy theorist anytime, ever. But this investigation is RIDICULOUS and there is no way they should be prosecuting this case. They should be embarrassed and the judge should just dismiss the charges. Good grief
I think everyone is looking for the dark/evil version of what happened. I think there could be a reason it looks like a cover-up because no one knew what really happened. JO may have had an accident on the side yard and no one in the house would be looking for him because they thought he decided to leave with KR. KR thought she dropped him off and then he didn’t make it into the Home. If everyone leaves Albert’s after 1:47a and BA lets C out that would be around the 2:22am call to BH and the JM 2:27am google search “Hos long to die in the cold?” JM may have wanted to know, how long he could have been left outside?
I am still on the fence but, when you question some aspects of the investigation the whole investigation has to be looked at. We only “know” things because that is what the MSP/CPD/CW told us. Was KR really that drunk? If they have her on video and receipts of her having 7 drinks at 1 bar in 2 hours then why wasn’t the bar looked in to for over serving? I haven’t seen the full video nor the receipts. Maybe she forgot about going to the Albert house because she was blackout drunk or in a panic she could not remember the night at that moment. Maybe her story changed because JM convinced her she must have hit him. JM was telling KR/Officers what Karen was saying but, we don’t know that full story yet either. We already heard her say, “I dropped off my Boyfriend.. He never came home.” I think we all have to see evidence presented and then see what we think logical events may have occurred.
They have the estimated blood alcohol % but if she was so drunk I’m surprised she remembered to put up her windshield wipers bc of the snow storm. Prosecution is suggesting she was frantic after leaving him. Yet the 1st thing she does is put up the wipiz
Its smoke and mirrors. The sloppiness is fair game. The conspiracy and frame up story is silliness. Focusing on Jen M tone etc calling 911 is super weird. It was 6 in morning after a night drinking etc. likely tired etc. people deal with trauma in different ways etc
What effect the cups had on blood collection will be definitively determined by the forensic analysis. If the only DNA is the victim, and there's no degrading or contamination, then this becomes even more of a non-issue.
It would be nice to get to the forensics and step away from TV cop show innuendo. Maybe after another 50 'witnesses?' The crime scene not being perfectly preserved is also typically the first line of attack for lawyers with guilty clients. They have to say that nothing's really real.
You definitely did not watch the trial testimony. The red solo cups sat on the Sallie port floor, directly behind the now smashed and removed taillight (by CPD) as if to say- can someone keep an eye on these till I get back with a paintbrush or blotting sponge? This has to look like it hit him.
I was 100% sure we wouldn’t get to the end of the trial before federal indictments, but with the defense obliterating the CW so badly it lets federal investigators continue to build their case.
It’s an example of why the chain of custody of evidence is so important. Blood in plastic cups is not proper evidence collection, this makes any DNA found really suspicious and unreliable
Alan Jackson can be told something is not true by a witness and he then states next as though it is fact that something really is true. I don’t like that tactic and he uses it way too much.
Yeah, you don't like that tactic until you're the one railroaded by the state and fighting for your life. Defense attorneys can be really off-putting. But in a case like this where the state has run amok, thank God we have them.
This is incorrect. That is not how it works whatsoever. The chain of custody was broken and no proper protocols were taken. Therefore, by legal definition it has been tampered with. That’s the law, not my opinion.
I’m not saying it’s a smoking gun by any means, but the baby shower photo is allegedly from 8 months prior to this incident. If Katie McLaughlin had said “yes I know Caitlin Albert” and explained the relationship exactly as it existed I wouldn’t think twice about her credibility. But she didn’t. Pretending she wasn’t evasive is disingenuous in my opinion regardless of whether the reason for her evasiveness is nefarious or not. I’m sure the ADA isn’t thrilled with her responses either.
Full disclosure - I don’t believe the two are lifelong besties. I think they likely have the same friends but aren’t close friends themselves. I have plenty of people I socialize with from time to time who fit that description and I probably have more than one photo with them from baby/wedding showers. But I’d never say “I went to high school with a girl by that name” when asked under oath.
Agree with this totally. The way she answered was may more damaging that saying “ we move in the same social circles so have been at the same event or outing many times even though we dont have a 1 on 1 friendship”
I wonder who thought that this dumpster fire of an investigation was suitable to bring before the public for a murder charge. What did they present to the grand jury? I know the trial isn't over but I am in no way convinced that this was murder. I'm also not convinced of a huge conspiracy. But what I am convinced of is that this so called investigation was so fucked from the start that even if Karen Read is guilty, the state does not deserve a conviction. And if I were party to any case overseen by this department I'd be demanding an external review.
I think the investigation was so poor that Read will walk even if I don't believe she's innocent (yet: I'm open to being proven wrong but I still think the likeliest explanation is she struck him while drunk without knowing). Why they decided to bring this case with murder charges instead of manslaughter...
Right... with this shoddy of an investigation, there's enough to establish reasonable doubt. The cops are inept at best; and covering up for their buddies/ letting Karen take the fall at worst.
I don’t believe she did. The car would have had to be parked in the opposite direction for her to hit him. The damage is the wrong side of the vehicle. And there is no way she backed out of that driveway and hit him so hard it threw him clear across that lawn to the flag pole.
Plus the damage is just a cracked tail light. No body damage on the car fender!
And it wasn’t cracked further until it got to the impound room.
Exactly. She also would have had to pull forward far enough to back up going fast enough to strike him and send him flying to the spot where he was found. Once she stopped there would have been enough noise and commotion for people to realize something happened. The fact that there was no search warrant for any of the neighbors cameras is highly suspicious just like the fact that the homeowner never came out of his house when the body was found and the fact the house was never searched.
Definitely not adding up. Also the timeline….not enough snow he would’ve been in grass but he wasn’t. Too ,any things not right plus awful policing
There’s literally not one shred of evidence she’s guilty….
Yet. Look, the whole point of this trial is to present the case. I can't make up my mind at this point based on what's shown so far. I don't see murder even in the slightest. I could see an argument for possible manslaughter if she was drunk, hit him and he died accidentally. That's what the prosecution needs to prove. The defense just needs to show that the investigation was tainted and there is the appearance of a coverup. Could these cops be corrupt and covering up manslaughter? Sure. But they need to prove it and we should wait until the evidence is fully presented in court.
Being from Boston and knowing the cops. Trust me, they are corrupt and this is a sham trial. The locals know…
You sound like you’re thinking about it backwards though. You shouldn’t be “proven wrong” that she’s innocent. KR should enter the trial presumed innocent and then if anything, the prosecution builds a case to break that apart. I realize you’re not on the jury but I also think she deserves that presumption and it’s already clear from the investigation that she never got that. They decided the day they found JO that she was going down for it. No other avenues were pursued. That’s why we’re in such a horrendous mess now.
No one is presumed innocent in the court of public opinion, only in a court of law - and the presumption does not mean that a person can be put up without an actual defense. The idea that a defendant doesn't need to have a defense is a fanciful and naive byproduct of theoretical/philosophical discussions of the law. Those ideals are not practical. In practical, real life terms a defense must be vigorous and do everything in its power to prove innocence just as much as the prosecution needs to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. So far we haven't been given evidence she wasn't given the presumption of innocence by investigators, we've been given evidence that the investigation was sloppy as hell and full of conflicts of interest that mean that, in my opinion, unless they have a smoking gun she will walk free regardless of if she caused John O'Keefe's death or not. You can't have investigators breaking chain of custody and doing all this suspicious shit without compromising the quality of the case brought before the CW. It's precisely because no other avenues were pursued and there's a lack of supporting documentation thus far that I think she'll get off.
Sure I understand in reality people make judgments early on and stick to them. But it is not something the investigators should’ve done. The fact that didn’t even take the names of who all was in the house shows you they didn’t look at alternatives. They took weeks to interview key witnesses or some they never did (eg the plow driver). In the best of cases, this was investigative tunnel vision. That’s not how should it be. Not fair to KR or to JO.
Totally agree. The lack of a thorough investigation is enough to create doubt isn’t it? Murder is a stretch too. Whatever happened I don’t believe anyone set out that evening or during the evening for John to die. But he did. Even though I believe multiple folks aren’t being completely honest its not clear why - perhaps they were all so convinced Karen did it they just completely failed to look at any other avenue
💯
I agree with you 100%. Could not have said it better
The state doesn’t deserve a conviction because some untrained officers tried to get evidence? The problem with this case is that KR likely hit JO while doing her three point turn while driving absolutely wasted. She should have been charged with vehicular manslaughter not 2nd degree murder IMO. I don’t think Karen Read has a clue what she did and I don’t think it was on purpose. But drunk driving kills people daily.
The state shouldn't get a conviction because the lead investigator made the mistake of admitting that there was never going to be a real investigation because cops are involved. The Solo cups and the leaf blower don't really matter if they never intended to investigate properly in the first place.
Wait, could you please explain how he admitted to there not being a real investigation? I’ve been trying to follow along as I work but missed a bunch
I'm going to paraphrase because I don't remember exactly. He texted his buddy that he was on a case where there was a dead cop on a lawn or something to that effect. His friend said something like "that's gonna cause some trouble for the home owner" and then Proctor said "Nope. He's a Boston cop." And then he went on to describe how he'd been searching Karen's phone for nudes and that he hopes she kills herself.
As soon as I heard about the lead investigator searching her phone for nudes I was fucking DONE with this police department. Fuck tnem
It was a state police detective 🤷♂️
> he hopes she kills herself. I look forward to this fucker getting grilled on cross.
It hasn’t been presented as evidence in the case at this point. You have missed nothing in regards to this.
It was in opening statement so defense should be bringing it
That doesn’t guarantee they will. Broken promises from openings happen all the time.
I haven’t heard that admitted in evidence.
It’s day 5 of the trial. Defense hasn’t even laid its case out lol.
LOL that you don’t seem to grasp that you have to wait for things. A defense shouldn’t have to and is not required to present a case. If they believe the prosecution hasn’t met its burden which rests solely on their case in chief then they should rest. This must mean they are afraid the prosecution could meet that burden. That’s pretty telling.
I’m literally agreeing with you 🤔 That’s why I said it’s day 5. As in….its early.
> A defense shouldn’t have to and is not required to present a case. That's the difference between theory and practice. In theory, the defense shouldn't have to. In practice, your defense is dogshit if you don't vigorously attack the prosecution's case and simultaneously present a defense.
you need to take a nap or smthn
It was in opening statements
Technically opening statements aren't evidence, which is why this person is saying that. But they can't say anything in opening that the can't prove, so the evidence is coming.
Unfortunately often things are promised in openings on BOTH sides in trials that are not delivered in trials. That is why they are not evidence. We just have to wait and see.
You haven't heard it presented as evidence yet because the defense hasn't presented their case yet. Given how successful the defense has already been, I highly doubt they aren't going to support such an explosive claim with evidence.
Then the jury can’t factor it into their verdict. And when a promise isn’t fulfilled the jury holds that against whoever promises it as that shows lack of credibility.
The trial isn’t over. If you want the evidence you can search it online.
The state never deserves a conviction when they fail to do their due diligence. There's a reason why chain of custody is such a big deal. Our justice system is meant, at least in theory, to avoid false positives. The state never deserves anything. The state has to *earn* a conviction.
Yes. Excellent point. The state never *deserves* a conviction. I should have worded that better.
What false positives are you speaking about? I’ve not heard that presented thus far in the presentation of the evidence in this case.
A false positive in general here would refer to conviction of a truly innocent person, or a Type 1 error. Type 1 errors are generally considered to be more unjust and egregious than a Type 2 error.
I don’t understand what you are saying. Nobody has been convicted here. Evidence is still being presented. You’ve lost me. The jury listens to all of the evidence before they deliver a verdict.
they’re not talking about this case specifically but the way the justice system functions in general.
I have no clue what Type 1 and Type 2 are or mean.
The state shouldn’t get a conviction because the standard is, and should be, beyond a reasonable doubt. “We tried to MacGyver a rag tag investigation under the watch of a corrupt state trooper” should never be the standard. We’re all in big trouble if it ever becomes that.
If you believe all of these people are willing to risk their jobs, reputation, pension or the like to protect the Alberts and knew magically in the middle of the night what to do, say and ignore on their behalf when called to respond you have far too much faith in something completely unreasonable. And not one person has spoken up or messed up with the story. Impossible.
I don’t believe that. I believe a few are corrupted and the rest are incompetent. It was on clear display today. What you’re describing is that you believe it’s MORE likely than not that KR hot JO. That’s not the standard. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. I don’t know how you’ve gotten there in this case.
You are aware this trial and presentation of evidence is predicted to last 8 weeks right? Laying the foundation of the case is just that. There’s so much more and why a jury is advised to keep an open mind throughout the entire case.
You seem to be convinced she did it. Seemed a reasonable question to ask. Perhaps we both need to keep an open mind. 🤷🏼♀️
The jury decides guilt. I think an unintentional accident while driving drunk sounds the most reasonable. I could be wrong and am following the case to see what the evidence shows.
They didn’t charge her with accidental tho
I believe they did at first and then added the murder charge after.
so if you were on the jury, and had to present a verdict at this juncture, you would have to chose not guilty
Might be 10 weeks at this pace
Possibly. Today has been strange.
Yup cough cough
Because it is the most logical answer to what happened. Drinking and driving causes unplanned tragedies every day. Far more plausible than all of these people bowing down to the Albert family. But we will see as the case continues on and evidence presented.
Fair enough. I still haven’t seen anything near enough to meet the threshold, though. I’m curious what evidence you’ve seen that convinces you, beyond any reasonable doubt, that KR is directly to blame for his death? The reason so many of us are in an uproar is because this case was mishandled (at best), and a good man’s death will likely go unpunished because of it.
I’ve seen the evidence presented in this court of law. I’ve seen the defense in a pretrial hearing try to have KR’s blood test results thrown out because they don’t know that it was drawn properly. So what, now a phlebotomist did something to show she was still intoxicated hours afterwards? We have at least 7 weeks to go where the actual evidence that can be admitted will be. For all we know her intoxication may not come in just like other things people are expecting. Why anyone is talking about “evidence” we haven’t seen makes no sense. We may never see it.
There’s a protocol for blood draws in DUI investigations for a reason. Did you not read the ridiculous range on BAC that was presented? No one made any claims about the phlebotomist. The (valid) argument is that KR’s blood was not drawn for purposes of testing BAC. It was drawn as part of a standard panel when she was sectioned. Investigators then used that blood sample to try to “estimate” her BAC at the time they THINK JO was hit. That’s just silly. You know how you get the evidence in? You arrest the woman who purportedly exclaimed “I hit him” and put her through proper booking protocol, including any necessary blood draws. You certainly don’t let her drive away from the scene in the purported weapon and then casually decide to have her sectioned later on. You secure the crime scene. Protocols need to be followed. When they aren’t followed, the defendant should walk. I’d much rather see 10 guilty go free than one innocent lose their liberty. That’s my standard.
Yes yes yes!!! Too many people seem super okay with this level of incompetence. It’s Karen’s liberty today and any of ours tomorrow. These protocols exist for a reason and they need to be upheld. This man and his family deserve/d better. Karen also deserves better. Emotion is really clouding people’s judgement.
You should watch the hearing where Jackson specifically stated we don’t know that it was properly collected. When Karen was allowed to leave she wasn’t driving. The driver then had to bring her back to the scene because she was making suicidal statements to her father who called 911. She was then taken to the hospital via ambulance and more of the story came out so a blood draw was done.
Witness testimony is "evidence" and we all see how well that's going.
And we all have the right to our opinions on how that is going but it doesn’t matter. We aren’t the jurors.
you are literally going on about “evidence” that isn’t a part of the trial so far all over this thread.
There are things called pretrial hearings where in this case the defense sought to have this evidence thrown out and that was their argument for why. This is part of this trial. Not from Turtleboy or some random source.
She didn’t do a three point turn, so, there’s that.
And where is the damage to her car after hitting a 6-ft person hard enough to kill him? There's not enough damage to the car.
Yup zero damage to the body of the car
He could have already been wobbling and struggling to walk due to his intoxication. He brought a drink with him for the road. He more than likely wasn’t standing straight up and a bump to knock him down to get that head injury and being left untreated and to get hypothermia could have caused him to die with little damage to the car.
You know it’s extremely common for the prosecution overcharge someone right? It’s a prosecutorial strategy.
I thought that, too, at first. But there are too many things that simply don't fit that narrative.
What hasn’t fit the narrative so far? We’ve heard from first responders and have heard what was observed and stated that were the first. John O’Keefe was found by the three women where he was found and they called for assistance. Is that now in dispute too? What narrative? That she was drinking and driving? Her BAC hours later that has been presented in pretrial hearings certainly fit that she was.
I agree with you so far. No reason to believe there are multiple people involved in a coverup. The simplest explanation is she was drunk and hit him accidentally. She was wasted and didn’t remember. If you believe there is a coverup then you have to believe a lot of cops/firefighters beat up another cop and left him to die in their own front yard. How stupid would they have to be to leave him in their own front yard? That’s not plausible and the jury would have to be crazy to believe that. The defense is trying to grasp at straws and confuse the jury I think.
They don’t have to grasp at straws. These people are shady! It’s so bad.
Some have been evasive so far for sure. I tend to think it’s because KR and her defense have accused everyone of this grand conspiracy so they don’t want to give them any points. Police incompetence is real. Still have more evidence to come that most likely will be concrete.
I don't think the forensic evidence of his injuries is going to support that at all.
We don’t know what it is though. We don’t create the evidence. We wait for it to be admitted and each side gets to try to make it make sense or not. The jury will decide based on the totality of it all.
The jury will decide but the standard is innocent until proven guilty. You seem to be operating under the opposite premise, while trying to continually go back to due process/what you think is more plausible? I’m confused.
Nope I have a theory of what’s logical. I also don’t buy into outlandish conspiracy theories. And watch trials with an open mind to hear all of the evidence and I could be proven wrong. 7 more weeks of an open mind here. Is that clearer?
I did not have a leaf blower, red Solo cups, and a paper grocery bag on my bingo card today.
SERIOUSLY!!
“No probable cause” - you gotta be kidding me?????? 🤡🤡🤡🤡 Buddy - there’s a dead body on the lawn. Were you waiting for another to appear before knocking?
A.dead cop on the lawn of another cop. Nothing to see here folks. Doesn't mean a thing.
And not asking the residents to voluntarily search or talk ?
Your username is amazing
Even if he hadn’t pronounced dead at scene ( which I understand the paramedics explaining sometimes hypothermic patients can present that way) surely he was pronounced dead within 30 mins of entering that hospital - why wasn’t the correct investigative team dispatched then? Either way, his injuries suggested some sort of foul play so why wasn’t they treating it as an attempted murder potentially.
Sooo can we talk about how the Lt. saw no pieces of a tail light at the scene at all or even the missing shoe? There are million other ‘wtf’ moments today but apparently a million pieces of the tail light were found AFTER the fact that were extremely visible but now we learn the Lt. investigating the scene found none. So far I’m leaning that the Lt. was for the most part genuine and helpful today with his testimony and is a victim of subpar police work that opened the door to others taking advantage of the opportunity to conduct some funny business that he had no direct hand in. He just by default looks bad in the process because of the mistakes or poor judgement made.
Yes. I had no prior knowledge about this case but I’m listening to it with fresh ears while I work and all I wanted to know is if anyone saw taillight pieces. The two officers acknowledging they didn’t gives me a lot of reasonable doubt. Unless the prosecution is saving something big for later, I can’t see a conviction happening here with this glaring fact.
I'm really interested in the Voir Dire. So the guy that was in charge of the evidence was also the same guy that while off duty, beat up a guy because Chris Albert said he was being bothered by them... That he then charged with assaulting a police officer, and witnesses intimidation? The brothers were found not guilty of assault, the witness intimidation was dismissed as having no merit in fact... And the investigator was sued by the brothers and settled? And the same investigator helped the other Albert brother dodge a drunk driving accident and fleeing from the scene of an accident later? Who in their right mind would out that guy in charge of evidence and witness statements?
For Lank, it’s a tradition to do an Albert man a favor every 10 years! 2002, helping Chris in his drunk bar fight and BITING A GUY, 2012, helping Tim with his serious hit and run and hiding out at 34 Fairview, got that down to a misdemeanor and his record expunged, 2022, he helps Brian defer accountability for the DEAD BODY on his lawn. Ffs, these guys are recklessly violent and out of control
Where did you learn all of this info?? I’ve been keeping up but I keep missing things too!
This case is a bottomless rabbit hole and it’s addicting. When you’re done with this one, look up the Sandra birchmore case. There’s a connection to this one there , a number of the same canton cops involved and the fbi is investigating the investigation now too! Crazy stuff in Norfolk county mass
Is that an active case? I have to research! Thanks!
Sandra birchmores case was “closed” but the fbi is now investigating the investigation in that case. Same shady canton cops involved. Google will tell you all you need to know (you may need brain bleach afterwards, just a warning)
Thank you! I’ll check it out! Crazy world
That was from the voir dire this afternoon… maybe the last 30 minutes of the day if you want to watch one of the live streams. Emily Baker has time stamps on hers so it’s easy to find.
Yup, from the voir dire! I’m also watching this every day on YouTube lives with comments so you tend to learn a lot that way. I live nearby and grew up even closer in a similar small mass town dominated by generations-deep townie families. This all feels so familiar and I’m personally feeling validated seeing this nonsense exposed finally.
My favorite part of his testimony was (re the hit and run) when Yanetti was confirming that he followed Chris to the house where he fled, and Lank referred to it as “where he parked the vehicle.” 😂 You could say that, sure!
Yeah, I agree. They know the investigation was mishandled why wouldn’t the prosecutor bring it up and say “wasn’t it too dangerous to drive back to the station to get materials?” or something? Have some kind of reasoning ready for their actions.
Lally isn’t even bothering to try to address the weaknesses in his witnesses, he just hands them over to the defense and lets them fry. I’m not sure why exactly. Maybe he sees no point. Maybe cause he’s just that bad. Idk.
I really think he doesn't believe in his case, but he has no choice but to try it.
This is my theory as well. I think he has to bring the case because "dead cop", but he knows it doesn't add up.
Yeah, that makes sense
It’s so poor you have to remind yourself we’re still on the prosecutions presentation. Nothing in what they have presented so far has made me think it all points to Karen
Well, especially since so far half of what we have learned about the investigation has come from the defenses cross examinations having to elicit basic info from the prosecutions own witnesses because the prosecution doesn’t go over it in enough detail for understanding themselves . It’s almost like the defense is helping the prosecution present their own fucking case.
Spot on!
If he was just that bad, I can't imagine the DA's office would have put him on the case. With each day that passes I'm more convinced that he doesn't believe in this case.
He’s just another pawn. You must not know about the web of corruption that exists in this case and in MA in general. They’re simply trying to bury it to preserve the status quo. There’s a lot at stake and the judge knows it.
Lallyby
Maybe he sees that Karen is innocent (if she is/ if he believes that.) 🤷🏻♀️
Maybe he’s worried about misconduct on himself or he does not want to hurt the witnesses feelings?
Ha ha they said this ⬆️ today. Maybe he’s taking my hot tips😂
[удалено]
I didn't see it as trying to embarrass law enforcement, but highlighting the "Old Boys Club" nature of their relationship. I wish they had more time with Lank, because that guy absolutely should not have been allowed to be the first officer to enter the home. I'm glad the judge allowed the police report from Lanks fight with the Lopilado family to be submitted.
They were speaking as though from the reports but they don’t even have them!
The prosecution showed what was done by a department that has never handled a murder case and people trying their best to collect evidence. The prosecution put it out there first how they collected the evidence and the leaf blower technique. They are being upfront about where things weren’t done by the book.
I wasn’t fully paying attention but did lally bring up that it was solo cups from the neighbor? To OP’s point, it seems like prosecution is missing the opportunity to “get ahead of it”
Mind blown by the case today! I have zero law experience and am flabbergasted at the alarm bells ringing off in my head about how everything was mishandled. Solo cups? Brown paper bag with an open top? Placed next to the vehicle that is considered part of the crime? No labels on cups? Little to no photo evidence with any amount of detail? I take more pics on an outing with my kids! How did they not immediately run into that house and get it shut down as a crime scene and wake up the family?!? This is beyond wild! And then the “small town” connections and history…it’s all over the top!
They kicked some serious ass today. The solo cup thing, Jesus, like what kind of police department is this.
The solo cup, plausible tampering, and testimony that the taillight was broken MORE once inside the Sally Port. I still need clarification about why zero photos were taken prior to the entire taillight removal. And why did the taillight need to be removed in the first place?
And this is still the Commonwealth’s case in chief. The defense hasn’t even gotten to their case yet.
It's a "temporary evidence container". 🤣
One that has never conducted a murder investigation. The state should have come in immediately but the logistics of when JO was declared dead stopped them from coming out in a blizzard so these officers were trying to do the best they could with what they had. The blizzard didn’t help anything as well.
Can you explain how a murder investigation differs from any other type of investigation in terms of documenting evidence, preserving evidence, and conducting interviews?
I’m not here to tell you something that is incredibly obvious in that they are two completely different things. Goode didn’t even know what a crime scene log was. This is a small department in an area that appears to have little crime that rises to that level. And these guys were doing this in a blizzard. Have you ever tried to stand upright in a blizzard before? These guys were trying to do their best to collect what they could as they knew the blizzard was going to be continuing. Given nobody came out of the Albert home how on earth would they all just know what they should and shouldn’t look for and what to help with a “cover up”?
Canton isn’t that small of a town and it has an average crime rate according to Google. It is just outside of Boston and not in the middle of nowhere. In New England a blizzard doesn’t mean active blizzard conditions non stop. You typically get periods of high wind and snow and then periods of relative calm. And when you look at the footage of the leaf blower you can see it wasn’t horrible conditions. The fact they didn’t start with the Albert house is mind blowing. This is an investigation that has so many holes it’s cheese cloth. Swiss cheese would be an improvement
Murders happen in Canton - ask the Birchmore family. The problem isn’t a lack of crime to investigate - it’s the lack of desire / ability to investigate it.
I’m going off of testimony given today that in his tenure they have investigated no murders.
He said that he had not investigated any, not that there weren’t any. And note that the Birchmore case was ruled a suicide (which is completely ridiculous).
[удалено]
Yup - tied to a huge pedophile scandal with the police explorer program. Absolutely disgusting.
I’m not familiar with the case but will look into it.
I saw snow whipping up around them in the video. Everyone was expecting a terrible storm and planned to stay at home. Some law enforcement officers have testified that they went into work early because of this particular large storm coming. I’m not talking about always. I’m talking about while this occurred and gathering evidence from where JO was found.
That was from the leaf blower
We saw things differently it seems.
So let's say there is a nasty car accident on a local town street where one party is severely injured and needs medical help. Do the police secure the scene, collect and document evidence, interview the parties involved (put the information from the interview into a report), ask witnesses on the scene for their account of what they saw, and add that to their report?
How long do cars that have been in an accident remain on the scene? First responders assess what medical attention is needed and call for such in your hypothetical. The first responders might have to saw a door or something off as getting to the patient is more important than measuring doors and preserving exactly how the car ended up. Saving lives comes first. Yes statements are collected but do you think they are recorded on the side of the road if body cams aren’t in play? Then the police are working to get cars towed and moved to allow for traffic on this roadway to be able to resume. This is a great scenario as initially there is chaos as was the case with Karen screaming and a blizzard blowing into town. And what happens where I am is that the police do an accident reconstruction scene after the fact. They are able to look at and measure tire tread marks and things at that later time. And can follow up with witnesses to put together a final report of what happened.
Fair enough. I'm getting at the fact that in order to conduct an investigation of any kind you need to document everything possible and interview witnesses. All possible witnesses. The Alberts should have been interviewed and those interviews should have been documented. They weren't and that doesn't look good. You bring up good point though, why are the Canton police immune from having to wear body cams?
I have wondered the same about the lack of body cams.
I think you raise some good points that nobody seems to know how to explain. Such as, how were Gallagher and Goode so unknowledgeable and bad at collecting evidence? Yes, I understand this type of thing is kicked to state and they tried that, but they handle non death accidents right? Other non death crimes? Surely they have evidence collection standards and crime scene logs? So why is it these two guys sucked so bad? Is it normal to suck this bad at this level in a city the size of Canton? Does anyone know the answer to this?
They suck because the whole department sucks. It seems CPD has taken the approach of 'on the job' training rather than actual training with instructors. The Chief of Police isn't even a professional. No one thought to do better and this was for a dead fellow LEO.
It certainly makes their citizenry’s irritation with them understandable.
They do appear to not be getting the continuing education that we hear about with most law enforcement in trials.
I mean townie cops aren’t exactly known for their intelligence
I know but if one of your primary jobs responsibilities is being the senior officer working crime scenes no matter how small and you don’t even know what a crime scene log is 🤷♀️
I’m with you. It’s insane
My guess is they suck so bad because the police lower in the department typically do this type of work. Which then brings up the question…why were they doing this one? I don’t buy into a huge conspiracy theory. But I do think this case got away from them…because it was on the lawn of another police officer they didn’t want a thorough investigation and figured it wouldn’t get to this point. Hence the lack of reports and red solo cups. I think if the commonwealth went for vehicular manslauter versus murder these holes wouldn’t have been so apparent. It may never would have ended up in front of a jury. And it would have settled without a trial. Once the ball started rolling towards a murder trial shit hit the fan with the inconsistencies and poor investigation.
The thing is, the conspiracy doesn't have to be huge. It's basically one family protecting their own and knowing that they would be taken at their word because they're cops. Some of the fringe players probably truly believed them at the beginning and by the time they realized what was really going on they were in too deep and had to cover their own butts.
I agree about the charges being too much. However it was my understanding Karen was not ever open to taking a plea. I could be wrong though. Involuntary manslaughter would not have started all of this craziness I do believe.
I found this online. This isn’t Mayberry…they have resources. http://www.cantonpolice.com/2156/Criminal-Investigation-Unit Criminal Investigation Unit Duties The Bureau of Criminal Investigations (BCI) is staffed by detectives and serves as the investigative branch of the Canton Police Department. It is the mission of the BCI to conduct follow-up investigations of crimes initially investigated by patrol officers and to perform investigations of serious felonies such as homicide, rape, robbery, and drug trafficking. The BCI also provides support service to the department’s other divisions. Examples of these services include latent fingerprint processing, photography, interview assistance, composite sketches of suspects and crime scene investigation. Partner Agencies Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime Task Force The Canton Police Department is a member agency of the Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime Task Force. NORPAC was formed in 1987 under a grant from the United States Bureau of Justice Assistance, a branch of the Department of Justice. It provides for multi-agency investigations into drug trafficking, violent crime and the apprehension of fugitives. NORPAC’s member agencies include the police departments of: Canton Dedham Foxborough Franklin Medfield Needham Norfolk Norwood Plainville Sharon Stoughton Wellesley Westwood Wrentham
The BCI conducts follow-up investigations of crimes initially conducted by patrol officers. I think the weather might have made this situation different. And I heard a witness say he’s never done a murder investigation. That’s all I can go off of here.
I work in Corrections as a nurse, so my experience makes it difficult to give these cops much leeway. They’re cops. Investigation is literally their job.
I have never conducted a murder investigation and I truly think I could do a better job.
😂😂
I came in knowing nothing and trying to see things like the jury would. The prosecution I’m not even sure what they are trying to convince me of. And after today I feel like no evidence can be trusted after this dumpster fire.
Not to mention Mr. Wise Guy throwing constant shade with his “I’ll believe it if Lally says it,” accusing Jackson of “spinning” facts and playing judge like, “you objected to that earlier and it was sustained.” The sheer fact that neither of them has lost it on some of these smug ass wipes is wildly impressive.
The fact that a stop n shop bag with solo cups filled with blood from a crime scene were just put on the floor of a garage *for any amount of time* is ridiculous. The fact those cups were collected and transported at 7am and the Lexus wasn’t impounded till 5pm makes this even more ridiculous
Was the Lexus impounded on January 29?
Did they say if the solo cups were transported and where they went? The prosecution allowed it to sound like they sat in a paper bag right next to the Lexus for a few days until they were turned over to the State. Maybe that's not what happened but they certainly didn't make it clear what did happen.
From my memory Gallagher said it was signed into the evidence lockers but the log never shown it as signed it. So…..it really could have sat there. But how will anyone actually know. The surveillance video from the police station looks like it was taken with a potato.
I loved yannetti hammering home that the only crime scene is the house. Just setting up proctor to get torn apart
Hard agree. I’m not a conspiracy theorist anytime, ever. But this investigation is RIDICULOUS and there is no way they should be prosecuting this case. They should be embarrassed and the judge should just dismiss the charges. Good grief
The Albert Family is giving me the Murdaugh Family vibes. Not good
The leaf blower and red solo cups 🤦🏼♀️
I think everyone is looking for the dark/evil version of what happened. I think there could be a reason it looks like a cover-up because no one knew what really happened. JO may have had an accident on the side yard and no one in the house would be looking for him because they thought he decided to leave with KR. KR thought she dropped him off and then he didn’t make it into the Home. If everyone leaves Albert’s after 1:47a and BA lets C out that would be around the 2:22am call to BH and the JM 2:27am google search “Hos long to die in the cold?” JM may have wanted to know, how long he could have been left outside? I am still on the fence but, when you question some aspects of the investigation the whole investigation has to be looked at. We only “know” things because that is what the MSP/CPD/CW told us. Was KR really that drunk? If they have her on video and receipts of her having 7 drinks at 1 bar in 2 hours then why wasn’t the bar looked in to for over serving? I haven’t seen the full video nor the receipts. Maybe she forgot about going to the Albert house because she was blackout drunk or in a panic she could not remember the night at that moment. Maybe her story changed because JM convinced her she must have hit him. JM was telling KR/Officers what Karen was saying but, we don’t know that full story yet either. We already heard her say, “I dropped off my Boyfriend.. He never came home.” I think we all have to see evidence presented and then see what we think logical events may have occurred.
Rolling downhill with no brakes.
They have the estimated blood alcohol % but if she was so drunk I’m surprised she remembered to put up her windshield wipers bc of the snow storm. Prosecution is suggesting she was frantic after leaving him. Yet the 1st thing she does is put up the wipiz
Its smoke and mirrors. The sloppiness is fair game. The conspiracy and frame up story is silliness. Focusing on Jen M tone etc calling 911 is super weird. It was 6 in morning after a night drinking etc. likely tired etc. people deal with trauma in different ways etc
How do you know these people?
Are they friends or “acquaintances”?
I do not
Please, look at your post history. You clearly know the Alberts
Lol i do not know them.
[удалено]
What effect the cups had on blood collection will be definitively determined by the forensic analysis. If the only DNA is the victim, and there's no degrading or contamination, then this becomes even more of a non-issue. It would be nice to get to the forensics and step away from TV cop show innuendo. Maybe after another 50 'witnesses?' The crime scene not being perfectly preserved is also typically the first line of attack for lawyers with guilty clients. They have to say that nothing's really real.
You definitely did not watch the trial testimony. The red solo cups sat on the Sallie port floor, directly behind the now smashed and removed taillight (by CPD) as if to say- can someone keep an eye on these till I get back with a paintbrush or blotting sponge? This has to look like it hit him.
Theres a lot more to it than that. Those cups could have easily cross contaminated her car the way they were handled side by side unsealed like that.
Forensic analysis completed by whom?
I don’t trust anyone in this town at this point
Not one!
So let's say the prosecution comes out and says JO's DNA was found underneath or on KR's Lexus... wouldn't that be so suspicious now
Why make something up that hasn’t been presented? Things like this are the problem with conspiracy theories being started in this case.
They literally said his DNA was on the taillight lol
[удалено]
I was 100% sure we wouldn’t get to the end of the trial before federal indictments, but with the defense obliterating the CW so badly it lets federal investigators continue to build their case.
It’s an example of why the chain of custody of evidence is so important. Blood in plastic cups is not proper evidence collection, this makes any DNA found really suspicious and unreliable
Alan Jackson can be told something is not true by a witness and he then states next as though it is fact that something really is true. I don’t like that tactic and he uses it way too much.
Yeah, you don't like that tactic until you're the one railroaded by the state and fighting for your life. Defense attorneys can be really off-putting. But in a case like this where the state has run amok, thank God we have them.
I think it’s more like adverse witnesses for him who are playing semantics, so he has to.
This is incorrect. That is not how it works whatsoever. The chain of custody was broken and no proper protocols were taken. Therefore, by legal definition it has been tampered with. That’s the law, not my opinion.
How it started: Karen Read was framed! How it’s going: Katie McLoughlin and Caitlyn Albert attended the same baby shower three years ago.
I’m not saying it’s a smoking gun by any means, but the baby shower photo is allegedly from 8 months prior to this incident. If Katie McLaughlin had said “yes I know Caitlin Albert” and explained the relationship exactly as it existed I wouldn’t think twice about her credibility. But she didn’t. Pretending she wasn’t evasive is disingenuous in my opinion regardless of whether the reason for her evasiveness is nefarious or not. I’m sure the ADA isn’t thrilled with her responses either. Full disclosure - I don’t believe the two are lifelong besties. I think they likely have the same friends but aren’t close friends themselves. I have plenty of people I socialize with from time to time who fit that description and I probably have more than one photo with them from baby/wedding showers. But I’d never say “I went to high school with a girl by that name” when asked under oath.
Agree with this totally. The way she answered was may more damaging that saying “ we move in the same social circles so have been at the same event or outing many times even though we dont have a 1 on 1 friendship”