Olivia
@OliviaLambo_ • 28,170 subscribers
hello
Shorts
![Trooper John Fanning, one of Michael Proctor’s supervisors at the NCDAO State Police Detective Unit (SPDU), reportedly “supervised” the jury at the #KarenReadTrial. As if this conflict alone wasn’t concerning, the fact that Fanning was later under an inconclusive internal investigation by the MSP for “whether [he] failed to adequately supervise by not taking appropriate action after Trooper Proctor sent inappropriate texts to a group of subordinate members, specifically, if he took any corrective action to address the unprofessionalism and inappropriateness of Trooper Proctor's texts”—thereby making him a potential witness & demonstrating his clear conflict, is incredibly concerning. In the full sit down interview w/ #KarenRead & Attorney Alan Jackson, Ted Daniel asks them about the potential jury tampering that occurred at the first trial—notably with the ultra curious last minute dismissal of 3 jurors, whose body language, reactions/expressions & outward demeanor appeared favorable to the defense, in addition to the “supervision” of the jury by one of Michael Proctor’s bosses, NCDAO SPDU Trooper John Fanning. It would be dishonest to try to claim that Trooper Fanning had no stake in the outcome of the Karen Read trial. Arguably, anyone with ties to the NCDAO, its SPDU or the Canton Police Department—and notably those with close ties to Michael Proctor, like his own supervisor, have clear conflicts of interest in this case. As you may recall, Trooper John Fanning was the lead investigator in the Sandra Birchmore case where he and his investigators concluded that Birchmore committed suicide while allegedly pregnant with a fellow Police Officer, Matthew Farwell’s baby, and wasn’t the obvious victim of murder by that same Officer who also raped and groomed her from a young age as revealed by 30k+ text messages inexplicably “overlooked” by Trooper Nicholas Guarino & Fanning. The Feds investigated that “investigation” too and have since indicted Matthew Farwell in Sandra Birchmore‘s murder. Additionally, Trooper Fanning was in one of Michael Proctor’s abhorrent group text message threads where he disparaged Karen Read. Fanning was subsequently internally investigated by MSP for this, and his failure to properly “supervise” Trooper Proctor—interesting that such a person would be chosen to “supervise” the jury. In a statement from the State Police, they said: “The Department’s internal affairs investigation determined that there was insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation that Lieutenant Fanning violated rules and regulations by failing to uphold the responsibilities of a supervisory member. This allegation has been classified as unfounded.” Frankly, given the circumstances of this case, it would be concerning if any member of the State Police oversaw and supervised the jury. Why was ANY member of the State Police supervising the jury? Has anyone ever heard of this before—Police Officers from the same agency that investigated, testified against & was a part of the prosecution against a defendant having one of their personnel in charge of and in direct control of the jury? This can’t possibly be a standard practice due to the obvious existing conflict, no? Plus, were it standard protocol, then why wasn’t the defense made aware of this fact until 10 minutes before making closing argument, after a nearly 10 week long trial? ——— Something majorly stinks about this, and perhaps it sheds some light on something peculiar that one of the deliberating jurors, who was recently interviewed by Aidan Kearney, kept saying in regard to the jury’s deliberative process. Specifically, something that stood out to me from juror Ron’s interview was his repeated use and references of the other jurors’ use of the term “distractors” to qualify or describe the abundant evidence representing “reasonable doubt” brought out by the defense at trial. “Distractors.” It’s somewhat of a novel term, especially in this context, and is obviously antithetical to a jury’s duty to assess a case based on the proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which is inherently intertwined with an assessment of the existence of, or lack thereof, reasonable doubt. There was no evidence or instructions from the court that came out at trial directing jurors to view defense evidence or ARCCA experts, for instance, as “distractors,” and the jury is very specifically instructed not to view/consume/bring any outside information into their deliberations. In other words, if they’re unsure who the ARCCA experts were there on behalf of (the Feds), they’re specifically told not to “fill in the blank” with information that’s not there, or evidence that didn’t come in at trial. So where did the information—this use of the term “distractors” come from? Who fed this term and this concept to the jury? The reason why it seems like it was “fed” to the jury is because it goes against everything the court, Judge Beverly Cannone, instructed them on. So, what prompted the whole “distractors” concept to taint the jurors’ minds and deliberations? ——— What immediately came to mind was the jury tampering by court clerk Becky Hill in the Alex Murdaugh murder trial. In that case, according to Murdaugh’s attorneys, Ms. Hill “invented a story about a Facebook post to remove a juror she believed might not vote guilty”. Judge Clifton Newman, who oversaw the murder trial, removed the female juror from the panel. According to the Murdaugh defense motion, Ms. Hill had gone to Judge Newman – the day after Murdaugh testified, not long before closing arguments – claiming that she had seen a post in the local Facebook group ‘Walterboro Word of Mouth’ from the juror’s former husband, Tim Stone. The post purportedly claimed that the juror was drinking with her ex-husband and, when she became drunk, she expressed her views on whether Murdaugh was innocent or guilty. A follow-up post from an account called Timothy Stone apologised for the post saying that he was driven by “Satan”. Murdaugh’s attorneys claimed that the Mr. Stone behind the Facebook posts was actually a random Georgia man who was ranting about his wife’s aunt – and has no connection to the case. Additionally, information from jurors had come to the defense’s attention about inappropriate comments supposedly made to them by Ms. Hill while she was “supervising” them—the same role as “supervisor” that Trooper John Fanning allegedly played in the Karen Read trial. In Murdaugh’s case, the jurors were *actually* brought back into the court and were called to the stand one by one and questioned about potential comments that may have tainted their verdict. A female juror, identified only as juror Z, said that Ms. Hill had told some of the jurors to “watch [Murdaugh] closely.” “To me, it felt like ... she made it feel like he was already guilty,” juror Z said. A separate juror, Juror E, said that he heard Ms. Hill say “watch [Murdaugh’s] body language”, but claimed that this did not affect his decision. ——— There were reports, at the time of the dismissal of the 3 defense-favorable jurors at Karen Read’s trial, that right before closing arguments, Trooper Fanning had reported the information responsible for dismissing these jurors to Judge Cannone. Among that information was reportedly a story about one of those jurors, claiming they’d been overheard discussing the case while drinking at a bar (or something to that effect)—a story that sounded highly suspicious at the time, particularly given the fact that Trooper Fanning had allegedly had that information weeks before, but never reported it to the court. The similarity in Becky Hill and John Fanning’s “stories” leading to the dismissal of defense-favorable jurors is rather uncanny. ——— Is it not problematic to have individuals—with conflicts of interest, who are also potential witnesses, and who seemingly have a vested interest in the outcome of the trial—be in charge of overseeing and supervising the jury? I’ve attached the referenced MSP Internal Investigative Report for Trooper Fanning to this post (attached in the comments below). What’s troubling is that, despite acknowledging in their report that “these allegations came to light on June 10, 2024, during the trial,” they didn’t immediately initiate an internal investigation, but instead waited until AFTER the trial ended, July 3, 2024, to launch their internal investigation, almost as if they were planning on not initiating an investigation had Karen Read been convicted, because apparently in that case the misconduct would’ve been justified… or something? It should also be noted that this same practice was employed for most, if not all, of the other Police Officers in this case, whose misconduct was exposed by the defense throughout the prosecution’s case at trial—whereby, despite admissions and the existence of evidence of their misconduct, the MSP, NCDAO and Canton PD seemingly did everything they could to avoid initiating any investigations or holding their officers accountable for their misconduct until after the trial ended—when they could no longer justify not doing anything. It makes you wonder: Had Karen Read been convicted, do you think they’d (the MSP, NCDAO or CPD) ever launch any internal investigations into the misconduct of their officers, as evidenced at trial, weeks before? ——— It should be mentioned that in the Sandra Birchmore case, which Trooper Fanning led the investigation of, despite the Feds spoon feeding the State Police & NCDAO (DA Michael Morrissey’s Office) overwhelming evidence + probable cause, in addition to punting the ball back to the state to do the right thing and charge Farwell with murder—a state level charge, they’ve refused to take any action to this day. In fact, not only has it now been nearly 6 months since the Feds apprehended & indicted Farwell, but the NCDAO, Fanning and the State Police, aside from taking no action, have made no statements and are still of the official position that Sandra Birchmore killed herself. To try to save face, the NCDAO, through its former spokesperson David Traub, tried to create the impression that the DA’s Office had been long working in collaboration with the Feds to secure an arrest in the Sandra Birchmore case, claiming that “two of [the NCDAO SPDU’s] detectives were present at the command post ... while federal authorities were attempting to take Matthew Farwell into custody”—whatever that means. This, of course, is patently absurd because the DA’s Office and State Police could’ve “secured an arrest” years ago—nobody was stopping them, but instead they framed Sandra Birchmore for her own murder. Spokesperson Traub then had the gall to say that “much of the information that they [federal authorities] built on originated with our investigation, including the collection of thousands of text messages.” (See a collection of statements from the NCDAO on the Birchmore case from reporting over the years, attached in comments below). While the Feds might be somewhat playing along with this narrative, don’t be fooled. Perhaps it’s to appease the very individuals who they’re investigating for the supposed coverup of Sandra Birchmore’s murder. Why? If the Feds had actually been collaborating with the State Police investigators from the NCDAO who investigated Sandra’s death, then at the Feds’ press conference announcing Farewell’s indictment, U.S. Attorney (at the time) Joshua Levy wouldn’t have feigned ignorance when asked who the lead investigator was on the case before his agency got involved (see clip 3 attached). Had the Feds actually been *collaborating* with the State Police & the DA’s Office, John Fanning’s name would’ve been the first thing uttered out of Josh Levy’s mouth. On a side note: I think this is very telling. Does it mean the U.S. Attorney’s Office is investigating Fanning? Who knows. But one thing’s for sure: Josh Levy 100% knew who the State Police lead investigator was and he deliberately avoided saying it. This observation is reflected in FBI Special Agent Chenee Castruita’s 45-page long probable cause affidavit for the arrest of Matthew Farwell, which notably contains ZERO references whatsoever to John Fanning, or any of the other involved State Police investigators for that matter. That’s telling. If there was so much “collaboration,” like DA Michael Morrissey’s Office wants the public to think, then not only would USA Josh Levy have had, at the very least, Trooper Fanning up there side-by-side with him at that press conference, but he would’ve acknowledged him by name in his press conference. Why hasn’t the NCDAO charged disgraced former Stoughton cop Matthew Farwell with murder? Is it yet another case of “pinning it on the girl” to cover up for fellow Police Officers’ crimes? ——— Of note, Trooper Fanning grew up in Stoughton, graduating from Stoughton High School in 1998, the same year that Matthew and his twin brother William—who also grew up in Stoughton—then 12 years old, became participants in the Stoughton police youth program. As Karen Read points out in the interview with Ted Daniels: “There were familiarities among players that never should’ve happened. There’s a sleeve of homicide in the Norfolk DA’s office, as there is in the other counties of Massachusetts. And yet, the person assigned to investigate this case—ostensibly investigate this case—lives a mile down the street from the crime scene.” (See clip 4 attached). Why is it that when there’s seemingly crimes—in this case murders, involving cops, that the NCDAO SPDU appears to send the most conflicted Trooper with the closest ties to that cop/those cops? In Officer John O’Keefe’s murder, the Trooper that lives down the street from 34 Fairview and is “second family” with the Alberts is obviously the last person who should’ve ever responded to that case, yet he was the lead investigator. Given Trooper John Fanning’s close ties to Stoughton, isn’t it interesting that he’s the one who was the lead investigator of Sandra Birchmore‘s death—a murder that allegedly involved a former Stoughton cop? What say you?](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1891692661267939807/ext_tw_video_thumb/1891692119082913792/pu/img/XXG39DUZUjLDvF8S.jpg)
Videos
Rob and Michele Reiner’s son, Nick Reiner, was booked on suspicion of murdering his parents and is being represented by Attorney Alan Jackson, flanked by Attorney Elizabeth Little leaving court today. Per procedure, he was not yet medically cleared to appear in court Tuesday.
Olivia1,192,632 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten
The blood trail outside Nancy Guthrie’s front door is confirmed to go all the way to the end of her front walkway to the driveway, as can be seen in this video. Interestingly, there was no vehicle parked there in the driveway seen in the footage released by the FBI today. Did a vehicle later pull up to the end of the path?
Olivia412,299 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten
Kelsey Fitzsimmons makes first public statements after being acquitted: “I got shot. I went to jail for 103 days. I haven’t seen my son. I had to sell my home that I worked very hard for. So, this is my first breath of fresh air, and I feel like I can breathe again.”
Olivia237,168 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten
Investigators seem very interested in something in the trunk of a Range Rover parked in a Culver’s parking lot located approx. 5 minutes away from the scene of an earlier SWAT operation in nearby Shadow Hills neighborhood. This is nearly 8 minutes from Nancy Guthrie’s home.
Olivia292,317 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten
BREAKING: Two detained in the Nancy Guthrie investigation as an active SWAT situation is occurring at a residence located approximately 30 minutes away from Nancy Guthrie’s home. Brian Entin confirms that a man and woman have been detained by Pima County Sheriff at this time.
Olivia273,569 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten
The whole world is seeing who the real McAlberts, Daniels (and apparently Nagels) are tonight. This is NOT how innocent people behave. “Imagine believing you have the right to jump out of your vehicle and put your hands on anyone” —Sleuthie. Imagine what these people do when they’re drunk and behind closed doors. Imagine feeling so entitled to sexually harass women and assault people in broad daylight in the middle of the center of town? And they’re the intimidated ones? They’re the victims? The way Julie & Ryan Nagel’s brother, Sam Nagel was sexually harassing Meredith O'Neil in an obvious attempt to provoke Aidan Kearney was disturbing (clip 2). An elected official, Chris Albert, welcomes outsiders to his town by saying he could beat their face up and down the sidewalk. The Canton Police Department, Massachusetts State Police and DA Michael Morrissey’s Office are entirely responsible for enabling these terrorists. Why did it take the Canton Police 17 minutes to respond when their Department is located 5 minutes away? How was Jill Daniels able to get there to assault Aidan before the Police were? But when Chris Albert calls them on speed dial because of peaceful protestors, they respond within 2 minutes? This is NOT how innocent people behave. And yes, they are terrorists. If you saw the stories I’ve been told by local Canton residents who’ve been threatened, harassed and intimidated by these people, you’d be disgusted. People in Canton are terrified because these people are protected by the Police. U.S. Attorney Massachusetts and FBI Boston: Hos long until you step in and clean up our state? This is what happens when the Police protect the real criminals. Just imagine if these people could have their way with Aidan behind closed doors at night. He’d wind up on someone’s lawn. Aidan has never threatened violence on any of these individuals. They just committed real violence on him. THEY are the only ones who should be charged with intimidation. Video 1: Jill Daniels assaulting Aidan Kearney. Jill Daniels is the sister of Julie Albert, Chris Albert’s wife, and the Aunt/Godmother of Colin Albert. Video 2: Ryan and Julie Nagel’s brother, Sam Nagel, sexually harassing Meredith. Video 3: Different angle of Jill Daniels assaulting Aidan. #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #KarenRead #CantonCoverup #PoliceCorruption #KarenReadTrial
Olivia805,915 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren
“I’m a f*cking idiot! I just tried to kill myself with an unloaded gun!” No wonder the state avoided interviewing critical witness Kelsey Fitzsimmons before indicting her. Now we also know why they didn’t call any of the first responding EMTs + firefighters, or hospital staff.
Olivia102,995 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten
BREAKING: New group text message revealed from Matt McCabe to Jen McCabe, Brian Albert and Nicole Albert, that was sent after Officer John O’Keefe was found murdered at 34 Fairview: “Yep, if she pleads out, it will end. If she fights it, it will be an episode.” The “she” is referring to Karen Read. That’s all these people wanted when they decided to frame Karen Read. They just wanted her to take it. Take the fall. Plead out and spare them from accountability. #KarenRead #JenMcCabe #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
Olivia308,873 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
WOW. JUST WOW. Michael Proctor is confronted with his text messages from August of 2022 where a photo of #KarenRead’s Attorney David Yannetti was sent & he replies “I truly hate him”. In a jaw dropping moment Attorney Alan Jackson asks Proctor: “How do you feel about him (Attorney Yannetti) now? He’s sitting right there” Shockingly, Proctor responds: “I still don’t care for him now!” ——————— Wow. What a classy, unbiased professional. Look at the absolute “shock and horrah” on everyone’s faces upon hearing such a response! What a total piece of human garbage. If this wasn’t a coverup, then why did Michael Proctor clearly have such vitriol and emotional disdain for some Attorney of a defendant he didn’t know, in an investigation with other people he supposedly didn’t know? Oh wait, we now know that was a lie and this “unbiased” Lead Investigator was anything but! Question: Why would a Lead Investigator on a homicide have such disdain for the legal counsel a defendant hires, if he doesn’t have a personal stake in the outcome like he would if he were covering up a murder for his friends and framing an innocent woman so that THEY, his “second family” don’t go down? Did he have such disdain for Attorney David Yannetti because he is one of the top criminal defense attorneys in the country, and Proctor became scared knowing his sloppy coverup was more likely to become exposed with the better the Attorneys Karen Read retained? And that angered him because he just wanted her to keel over and submit—be their scapegoat goddamn*t! Well Michael Proctor, welcome to hell! Because Attorneys Alan Jackson, David Yannetti and Elizabeth Little—WE AIN’T GOT NO QUIT! #KarenReadTrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup #PoliceCorruption #MichaelProctor #MassachusettsStatePolice
Olivia476,977 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren
Here’s an example of the apparent dishonesty of the MSP & DA Michael Morrissey’s office from day 1 in the #KarenRead case as they leaked knowably fabricated information to the local news claiming to have Ring cam surveillance footage of Karen Read striking & killing #JohnOKeefe with her car. They don’t and have never had ANY surveillance footage of John being killed or Karen hitting him. So that’s not a scriveners error. This reporting is from February 1, 2022 right around when Karen was arrested. DA Michael Morrissey, when offering evidence & commenting on the innocence of the involved or guilt of the defendant, in his video calling out the public (who are not DA’s) for “trying the case” on the internet/in the media, highlighted how statements made on the internet/by the public are not subject to the rules of perjury. It’s not like the news media can hold the DA’s office accountable to produce the evidence they claimed to have like in this news clip, as evidently Michael Morrissey is well aware of. Was this dishonest misrepresentation of the states evidence made in order to compensate for the lack of reliable probable cause to charge Karen? They had more probable cause on Brian Walshe on day 4 (the day they charged Karen) yet waited until day 17 to charge him. The fix was in rather quick it seems. Did you know in the Brian Walshe case, the same MSP crime lab had no problem turning around complex blood, DNA and other testing in that same timeframe? Despite having nearly 2yrs now, and it being long after the defendant, Karen, was arrested, the state still doesn’t have evidence test results. Additionally, in the apparent narrative push, the former CPD Chief Berkowitz personally contacted journalists at the time covering the story & requested they change or remove facts from their reporting, in effort to protect Brian Albert. There appeared to be a full scale effort by several individuals of authority across agencies to drive the narrative or use their positions of authority to influence the reporting of the facts to the public. The reporter, who Berkowitz contacted, likely very intimidated to be getting a call from the Chief of Police asking him to change factual info in his reporting, ultimately just removed his entire article altogether. If I’m not mistaken, I believe that journalist also discontinued his coverage of the case from there on out. If that’s not intimidation of the public or journalists, purely on the grounds of reporting public facts pertaining to the case, I don’t know what is. The arrest of the investigative journalist Aidan Kearney, by the very officers whose corruption he was exposing, further reinforces the concerted effort by LE in this case to intimidate journalists & members of the public from exercising their first amendment right. They did not like being scrutinized or those trying to hold them to account so instead they’ve tried to silence them with their charging authority. Before really diving into the court filings, I always found the claims that Karen was asking “could I have hit him?” at the scene to be curious, as though someone had asked Karen that or proposed that idea. I thought—why would one be asking this question? how could you not know? I was curious: if this was a coverup, how could someone particularly who’s distraught, be convinced of or questioning if they could’ve hit their significant other? The only thing I could come up with is if they’re told that they have you on camera in surveillance footage doing it… because… why would someone lie about that? It’d probably make any sane person start questioning reality. Was Karen Read being told this lie that morning/day? “You’re on Ring cam doing it! We have surveillance footage!” What does one even say to that? #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup #FreeTurtleboy
Olivia584,287 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren
All criminal defendants are presumed innocent in the United States. A jury spoke loud and clear that Karen Read maintains that innocence when they acquitted her last June. Civil attorneys can’t silence or sensor that truth as much as they may try. Karen Read did not kill John O’Keefe. That means someone else did.
Olivia40,179 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat
BREAKING - PERJURY ALERT: Kerry Roberts lied under oath to the grand jury to help Jen McCabe frame #KarenRead for her (Jen’s) incriminating 2:27am Google search. Kerry just admitted that she’d previously lied and claimed she’d heard Karen Read ask Jen McCabe to Google “hypothermia”. However, today Kerry admitted she’d never heard Karen Read ask Jen McCabe any such thing, but rather was lying about something that never happened, and was doing so merely because Jen McCabe “said” something happened. Takeaway? Kerry Roberts has proven she will testify to things as fact that Jen McCabe tells her. Kerry Roberts claimed to have gotten this info from when her and Jen McCabe made their alibi scripts aka “timelines” together. As a reminder, Michelle Troconis was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder where the majority incriminating evidence was her handwritten timelines aka “alibi scripts”. #KarenRead #KerryRoberts #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
Olivia229,522 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
![EXPOSING JEN MCCABE’S 2:27AM SEARCH 🧵A thread🧵 Proof she’s lying. No computer expert necessary. ADA Adam Lally asks Jen McCabe about when & why she made those Google searches at the scene in the morning. The video footage proves that Jen McCabe’s entire story about #KarenRead purportedly asking her to Google “hos long to die in cold” is a lie because it never happened. Jen claims Karen asked her to make those Google searches while the first responders are moving #JohnOKeefe’s body from the ground to the ambulance, which is interesting because her story starts out with them (her & Karen) seated in the back of a Police cruiser, so it’s unclear how they magically teleported from there to standing outside. As you’ll also see in the attached footage, it’s clear Jen & Karen are outside the entirety of the time leading up to when Jen claims this happened, removing the possibility that they could’ve moved from a cruiser to the outside to account for Jen’s story’s discrepancies. Officer Mullaney will further corroborate this. THE PROBLEM IS: Jen McCabe claims to have made these searches during the same time that first responders were working on/moving John into the ambulance, but this is completely disproven by dashcam surveillance footage from the scene showing him being worked on at 6:14:10am & moved into the ambulance at 6:14:50am. Jen made no searches at or around this time. She made her searches at 6:23 & 6:24am, nearly 10 minutes later. Furthermore, none of the things—like prayers & blood—that Jen claims happened between her, Karen & Kerry at this time, actually happen. The footage shows it’s all made up, like Karen asking Jen to Google anything. ————— JEN MCCABE’S TESTIMONY: Jen claims she was sitting in the back of the Police cruiser with #KarenRead, that she “scooched in” beside her in the back, and that Kerry Roberts came over. Next, Jen claims that Karen grabbed their hands & asked them to pray, looked at her (own) hands & saw blood, and proceeded to ask if she could’ve gotten her period. Jen then claims Karen said “what if he’s dead? Who’s gonna take care of the kids?” (or something to that effect). Jen then says: “Then we prayed. Um…then at the end, um, Mister—they were moving John, and at that point Karen told Kerry ‘go over, look! Is he dead? Is he dead? Is he dead?’ over & over, and Kerry says ‘I’ll go over and check on him’ and [Karen] was yelling ‘are they working on him?’.” Jen proceeds to say: “And then at that point, [Karen] grabbed my hands & she said ‘Google hypothermia, Google how long it takes to die in the cold’.” Then Jen McCabe testifies: “And so I had my phone out, and it was cold, and my hands were frozen, and I have MS, and I took my phone out while she was screaming & shaking my arm. And I attempted to Google “how long does it take to die in the cold”. ADA Lally then asks Jen McCabe: “And, um, when you conducted that search, that was at the defendant’s request, on scene, sometime after 6am on that date, correct?” Jen testifies: “Yes.” ADA Lally: “Do you recall anything as far as what the search results were, or did you click on anything, or did you get an answer to the question the defendant had posed to you?” Jen McCabe: “I don’t even think I got an answer because as I kept Googling, and she kept yelling, and then they were moving John, and the next thing I knew we were kind of moving because she wanted to see if they were working on him.” ADA Lally: “And so you were moving along with the defendant over towards where Mr. O’Keefe had gone to the back of the ambulance?” Jen McCabe: “Yes we kind of just moved to see what was going on.” ADA Lally: “When you moved over what did you see then?” Jen McCabe: “They were just, uh putting him in the back of the ambulance.” ————— See attached timeline. If Jen’s claim that Karen asked her to Google that were true, then Jen would’ve Google’d it during any time in the orange/red box (6:14 - 6:15am). #KarenReadTrial](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1818453979686146278/amplify_video_thumb/1818453323718000640/img/W-U5FmZsSOoKF9rr.jpg)
EXPOSING JEN MCCABE’S 2:27AM SEARCH 🧵A thread🧵 Proof she’s lying. No computer expert necessary. ADA Adam Lally asks Jen McCabe about when & why she made those Google searches at the scene in the morning. The video footage proves that Jen McCabe’s entire story about #KarenRead purportedly asking her to Google “hos long to die in cold” is a lie because it never happened. Jen claims Karen asked her to make those Google searches while the first responders are moving #JohnOKeefe’s body from the ground to the ambulance, which is interesting because her story starts out with them (her & Karen) seated in the back of a Police cruiser, so it’s unclear how they magically teleported from there to standing outside. As you’ll also see in the attached footage, it’s clear Jen & Karen are outside the entirety of the time leading up to when Jen claims this happened, removing the possibility that they could’ve moved from a cruiser to the outside to account for Jen’s story’s discrepancies. Officer Mullaney will further corroborate this. THE PROBLEM IS: Jen McCabe claims to have made these searches during the same time that first responders were working on/moving John into the ambulance, but this is completely disproven by dashcam surveillance footage from the scene showing him being worked on at 6:14:10am & moved into the ambulance at 6:14:50am. Jen made no searches at or around this time. She made her searches at 6:23 & 6:24am, nearly 10 minutes later. Furthermore, none of the things—like prayers & blood—that Jen claims happened between her, Karen & Kerry at this time, actually happen. The footage shows it’s all made up, like Karen asking Jen to Google anything. ————— JEN MCCABE’S TESTIMONY: Jen claims she was sitting in the back of the Police cruiser with #KarenRead, that she “scooched in” beside her in the back, and that Kerry Roberts came over. Next, Jen claims that Karen grabbed their hands & asked them to pray, looked at her (own) hands & saw blood, and proceeded to ask if she could’ve gotten her period. Jen then claims Karen said “what if he’s dead? Who’s gonna take care of the kids?” (or something to that effect). Jen then says: “Then we prayed. Um…then at the end, um, Mister—they were moving John, and at that point Karen told Kerry ‘go over, look! Is he dead? Is he dead? Is he dead?’ over & over, and Kerry says ‘I’ll go over and check on him’ and [Karen] was yelling ‘are they working on him?’.” Jen proceeds to say: “And then at that point, [Karen] grabbed my hands & she said ‘Google hypothermia, Google how long it takes to die in the cold’.” Then Jen McCabe testifies: “And so I had my phone out, and it was cold, and my hands were frozen, and I have MS, and I took my phone out while she was screaming & shaking my arm. And I attempted to Google “how long does it take to die in the cold”. ADA Lally then asks Jen McCabe: “And, um, when you conducted that search, that was at the defendant’s request, on scene, sometime after 6am on that date, correct?” Jen testifies: “Yes.” ADA Lally: “Do you recall anything as far as what the search results were, or did you click on anything, or did you get an answer to the question the defendant had posed to you?” Jen McCabe: “I don’t even think I got an answer because as I kept Googling, and she kept yelling, and then they were moving John, and the next thing I knew we were kind of moving because she wanted to see if they were working on him.” ADA Lally: “And so you were moving along with the defendant over towards where Mr. O’Keefe had gone to the back of the ambulance?” Jen McCabe: “Yes we kind of just moved to see what was going on.” ADA Lally: “When you moved over what did you see then?” Jen McCabe: “They were just, uh putting him in the back of the ambulance.” ————— See attached timeline. If Jen’s claim that Karen asked her to Google that were true, then Jen would’ve Google’d it during any time in the orange/red box (6:14 - 6:15am). #KarenReadTrial
Olivia336,456 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
NOT GUILTY. NOT GUILTY. NOT GUILTY. Hey Michael Morrissey? Two years and counting. We ain’t got no quit! The people of this county will not quit! And I guaran-damn-tee you Karen Read and her family will NEVER, EVER QUIT! AND THEY DID NOT! FREE AT LAST! #FreeKarenRead
Olivia183,054 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
DISCLAIMER: This video is from day 2 of deliberations during the FIRST trial. It’s eerie watching this back knowing what we know now. Judge Cannone refuses—again—to put “Not Guilty” on the verdict slip. Think about that. In a system where defendants are presumed innocent… The judge is actively blocking a “Not Guilty” finding. As Alan Jackson said: “It’s almost like the court is directing a verdict to the subordinate charges.” #KarenRead
Olivia176,491 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Why did Ian Whiffin agree to give expert testimony on Jen McCabe’s cellphone extraction, when the state refused to let him look at or even give him the full, original extraction OR its verification hash? A thread🧵 Full cellphone extractions, sometimes called forensic images, generate what’s called a “hash value”, which serves as a unique digital fingerprint necessary for ensuring the integrity of data. Any discrepancy between the hash values indicates tampering with or corruption of evidence, alerting forensic examiners to potential issues with the evidence. Hash verification is a fundamental principle and a rather ubiquitous practice in the world of digital forensics, where data validation and verification are key. It is the gold standard across the industry, and has also become so in the courtroom, whereby admissibility of digital evidence is determined by its relevance, authenticity and reliability. In court, the hash value can be used to demonstrate that the evidence has not been altered since its collection, and is a universal way for experts to authenticate and validate the reliability of data for the trial Court. But, an extraction that’s missing a hash value altogether is a huge red flag. 🚩 Who removed the hash value? And why? It’s necessary to the chain of custody, and as Gaurino and Tully would be well aware, it’s also an element of the data that an expert would require in order to verify and validate it. There’s no “good” reason for why someone would remove a hash value, and the extraction can’t be characterized as a forensic image as its origin is unknown. This was a deliberate step taken to hide something, which one could argue shows consciousness of guilt. If the data are true and accurate, why would you bring their integrity into question by removing the hash? However, if the data were altered or tampered with, and let’s say, hypothetically speaking, you wanted a digital forensic expert to provide testimony supportive of your “Google search” theory. . . In that hypothetical, you’d have to remove the hash value. Otherwise, the expert would immediately detect that the data were altered, as they would not be able to verify the hash against the original. #KarenReadTrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup #PoliceCorruption #KarenRead #Cellebrite #DFIR
Olivia270,376 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Holy consciousness of guilt! Jen McCabe—unprompted—and when confronted with her incriminating phone call to Nicole Albert at 34 Fairview at 5:07am before finding John O’Keefe’s body, states: “There’s nothing nefarious… there’s nothing about me calling my sister that’s nefarious and I feel like you’re insinuating it might be and it’s not.” WOW. #KarenRead #JenMcCabe #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
Olivia192,456 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr