Karen Read Trial: 9 Shocking Moments From Boyfriend Cop Murder Trial Openings

1. If you’ve used Incognito mode in Google’s Chrome browser, find out if you have a claim in a few clicks by visiting https://incognitoclaims.com/crimefix

2. Read gave an interview 9 months ago with abc news, during that interview that I watched Karen Read states that she pulled into the Alberts driveway and John O’Keefe got out of the car and she watched him walk up to the side entrance door of the house, that’s right off the driveway…Read not her attorneys have ever uttered a words of the story Karen Read told abc news. No one that saw the SUV outside of that house on Fairview Drive, ever saw Reads Lexus SUV in the driveway …This women also admitted to hitting him early that morning. Karen Read is not innocent in John Okeefe’s death, she is a huge liar, all you have to do is watch the interviews she’s done in regards to this incident that ended with the death of an innocent person , who by everything I have heard and seen was a giving, honest, caring loving upstanding person .

3. Million dollar question….who framed Roger rabbit?

4. Since I heard about this case, it appeared to me that he was not only attacked by the dog Chloe, but he was also beaten to death and then thrown outside to make it look as if he was hit by a car. They are definitely framing Karen Read. I don't believe she killed him.

5. Lally’s opening was dry, bored, and hard to follow. Yanetti’s was bold, exciting, and gripping. THATS how you open. 4 weeks in, after 42 witnesses, and Lally has yet to explain how Karen did this. But, we know what all the witnesses had to drink, their life and back story’s, and what sports their kids play.

   At this point in a trial we should be firmly on Team Guilty… unfortunately all they’ve done is show us all nothing but reasonable doubt!

6. She was involved in the whole thing somehow!!!

7. I’d rather be a suspect in a murder than have to sit there as a juror and listen to the State’s prosecutor make that opening statement. That was the most monotonous, boring, and life sucking opening statement I’ve ever heard. For a case that’s gotten so much notoriety, the commonwealth really sucked the life out of the case from the get-go. What a wasted opportunity to make an impression on the jurors.

8. I'm not seeing 9 of anything shocking

9. why is her trial videoed so well? all these close-ups of her. strange cause not all trials are.

10. This first guy is way to boring. no personality and monotone. he has my attention for less than 3 minutes. sad who chose him to start

11. I hope once she is exonerated they charge the Albert’s with his murder. All the evidence points towards them.

12. so the wife supposedly left the scene of the crime to go pick up reid to look for john, she didn’t see the body when she left her house lol

13. If the defendant orchestrated a cover up by pretending to search for the victim and pretends to try to save his life, why would she ruin it all by saying, I killed him, it's my fault? The homeowner where the body was found never came out of the house, even with all the EMTs, Ambulance, police. The homeowner was never concerned or curious that his friend was found dead on his front lawn.

14. The prosecution's opening was very hard to follow. Jumping around the timeline, naming every individual involved instead of just naming the key players and using monotone did not help. And unfortunately their direct examination reflects the same. Spending too much time focusing on facts already established (the fact it was snowing, what the EMTs daily schedule is like, how long married witnesses have been married to each other, the names of children not subject to the case etc), asking compound and confusing questions, jumping around the time-line even more…
    I am not a legal expert, but I have sat through lectures in classes where it was important to focus but the speaker was dull. Most of the useful information went out the window despite taking notes. I imagine it's the same for the jury. The defense knows how to pull focus and how to punctuate their speech to draw attention to key things they want everyone to keep in mind.

15. If there was ever a case of corruption in police this is it. WHAT an utter waste of TAX Payers Money

16. I've looked into this case and it could go either way. I honestly can't tell if she killed him or someone at the house did.

    Regardless, her attorney (or someone) needs to counsel Karen on her RBF. (Resting bish face.) It's giving massive negative vibes to the jury and while they shouldn't, research shows that some juries will convict a person solely on their impression of the accused.

17. She looks like AOC. The prosecutor is not believable. Isn’t Mass known for having corrupt cops?

18. I thought she was great on the Sopranos but she never should have talked to the Feds.

19. Angenette Levey, brilliant analysis 👏

20. Dig deep on this one, this trial shouldn’t be happening with this judge. She knows the family whose house this all went down at. If you listed you hear her constantly sighing 😮‍💨 and letting objections happen when it starts to get deep with defense questions

21. I don’t know if she’s guilty in reality, but (IMO) she’s not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for 2nd degree murder. I don’t understand why they didn’t go with involuntary manslaughter…

22. so he was killed by his police buddy and they now are covering it up

23. I always hate it when the victim's family is so dead-set on the defendant being guilty – especially in a situation like this where there's clearly various shady things going on with this investigation. Especially with the scratch and bite marks on the arm, and the fact that they never bothered investigating that house. What does the victim's mom think of the google search that the one woman did? Does she just think it's irrelevant or something?

    Though, granted, maybe the investigators and prosecutors have been talking to her a lot, so she's kinda seeing everything from their perspective and just believing what they're telling her.

24. Very alarming to see so many defending her.

25. Beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the standard. You don’t have to think she’s innocent. But the prosecution’s case seems to be innuendo and speculation. That’s not what we do here.

26. Everyone that left the house didn’t see the body laying out on the lawn. Because there was no body on the lawn. He was killed in the house. The prosecution should be jailed after this case. There’s no chance that the prosecutor believes that he’s saying.

27. So no one in the house text him and said yo where you at I thought you were coming over after the bar. Free Karen Read

28. I don't buy the prosecutions story im sorry. It doesn't add up. Once i heard the autopsy report i felt like something is way off. A cracked tail light really? His injuries do not seem like he was hit by a car, more like beat up and thrown outside. He had dog bites for goodness sakes and the people sold their house and got rid of the dog. Seem weird to anyone?

Comments are closed.