Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Remember that looooong back-and-forth at trial about Karen’s SUV which way it was facing, where it was parked, every possible angle of the vehicle? Cool. Now let’s talk about what wasn’t in Jen’s statement to Proctor on January 29th. According to Sgt. Goode’s narrative, she said she saw Karen... show more

Dixie Normus

8,345 subscribers

16,656 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

I keep hearing that we should all be more open minded and consider the House Defendants version of events…and honestly, I would love to. I would love to believe them. I would love to support them. I would love to say this was all one big misunderstanding. But I can’t even get past the part that their own testimony doesn’t fit with basic physics, basic space, or basic common sense. 3 separate people who were directly behind Karen’s vehicle testified they were stopped at the mailbox behind her. All three said they saw the dome light on. All three said there was only one person in the SUV. Okay… fine. But according to the same narrative we’re supposed to believe that Higgins’ Jeep was parked right there Jen McCabe was at the front door, Jen’s first statement says she saw the passenger door open with the dome light on and Karen somehow reversed a long distance… without hitting the Jeep…without anyone noticing anything unusual… I’m still waiting for someone anyone on that side to explain how all of those things can be true at the same time. Because right now, the only thing that doesn’t fit… is their version. So answer me this... If john was not in the vehicle where was he Where was higgins's jeep? Where did jen's open passenger door statement dissappear to, when she was standing at the front door? Let's start there! #JusticeforJohnOkeefe

I keep hearing that we should all be more open minded and consider the House Defendants version of events…and honestly, I would love to. I would love to believe them. I would love to support them. I would love to say this was all one big misunderstanding. But I can’t even get past the part that their own testimony doesn’t fit with basic physics, basic space, or basic common sense. 3 separate people who were directly behind Karen’s vehicle testified they were stopped at the mailbox behind her. All three said they saw the dome light on. All three said there was only one person in the SUV. Okay… fine. But according to the same narrative we’re supposed to believe that Higgins’ Jeep was parked right there Jen McCabe was at the front door, Jen’s first statement says she saw the passenger door open with the dome light on and Karen somehow reversed a long distance… without hitting the Jeep…without anyone noticing anything unusual… I’m still waiting for someone anyone on that side to explain how all of those things can be true at the same time. Because right now, the only thing that doesn’t fit… is their version. So answer me this... If john was not in the vehicle where was he Where was higgins's jeep? Where did jen's open passenger door statement dissappear to, when she was standing at the front door? Let's start there! #JusticeforJohnOkeefe

Dixie Normus

27,678 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

According to Sgt. Sean Goode’s report from the morning of January 29, 2022, Jennifer McCabe said she saw Karen and John pull up, saw the passenger door open, they never came inside, and then the car drove away. That is not a vague impression. That is a very specific observation. Because if you are standing at the front door, looking out into the dark, and you can see a passenger door open, that generally means the dome light comes on. Interior light. Movement. Visibility. It’s not exactly subtle. Yet somehow, when trial rolls around, the open door detail evaporates. Just gone. No big deal. Must have slipped everyone’s mind. Now enter Ryan Nagel. He testifies he arrived around 12:23 a.m., texted his sister outside, waited about five minutes, and then left. That 12:23 timestamp matters. Months later, Jen asks Julie Nagel for a screenshot of the text between Julie and Ryan showing that arrival time. She admits she asked for it. She knew Julie was a witness. The screenshot reflected the exact time Ryan pulled up. The only reason we even know about this request is because of phone extraction. And she isn’t sure whether she ever gave that screenshot to law enforcement, because someone deleted that screenshot. At the same time, she testifies she does not have an independent recollection of the exact time and says she was not looking at her watch. Except she was actively texting. And phones tend to display the time. Constantly. Every text has a timestamp right there on the screen. You do not need a Rolex to know what time it is when you are sending messages. So on one hand we get I don’t recall the time. On the other hand, we get a later effort to obtain documentary confirmation of the time. Apparently she cannot remember what time it was, but she knows it was important enough to chase down a screenshot months later. And let’s circle back to jen… If someone is watching closely enough in the dark to see a passenger door open and, by implication, a dome light activate, then they are watching closely. Close enough to notice light. Movement. A door. But not close enough to have any sense of timing while holding a phone that literally displays the time on its face. Now back to Ryan’s timeline. the story of his night shifts between Trial 1 and Trial 2. In Trial 1, the sequence was CF McCarthy’s, then Hillside Pub across town, then 34 Fairview. In Trial 2, his evening is presented as going from CF McCarthy’s to 34 Fairview. Hillside Pub is not mentioned. Same witness. Same night. Different routing. Then there is the sister issue. In Trial 1, he references his sister being at CF McCarthy’s twice. In Trial 2, he references her there once. But she was already at 34 Fairview. So now we are left asking whether she was ever at McCarthy’s that night, whether he misspoke, or why Hillside quietly disappears the second time around. None of that automatically equals deception. People misspeak. Memories shift. Trials are stressful. But when details appear, disappear, and rearrange themselves depending on which courtroom you are in, it does raise eyebrows. Especially when the original observation was specific enough to include seeing a passenger door open in the dark. Just not what time it was... and where did that pesky screenshot vanish to??????

According to Sgt. Sean Goode’s report from the morning of January 29, 2022, Jennifer McCabe said she saw Karen and John pull up, saw the passenger door open, they never came inside, and then the car drove away. That is not a vague impression. That is a very specific observation. Because if you are standing at the front door, looking out into the dark, and you can see a passenger door open, that generally means the dome light comes on. Interior light. Movement. Visibility. It’s not exactly subtle. Yet somehow, when trial rolls around, the open door detail evaporates. Just gone. No big deal. Must have slipped everyone’s mind. Now enter Ryan Nagel. He testifies he arrived around 12:23 a.m., texted his sister outside, waited about five minutes, and then left. That 12:23 timestamp matters. Months later, Jen asks Julie Nagel for a screenshot of the text between Julie and Ryan showing that arrival time. She admits she asked for it. She knew Julie was a witness. The screenshot reflected the exact time Ryan pulled up. The only reason we even know about this request is because of phone extraction. And she isn’t sure whether she ever gave that screenshot to law enforcement, because someone deleted that screenshot. At the same time, she testifies she does not have an independent recollection of the exact time and says she was not looking at her watch. Except she was actively texting. And phones tend to display the time. Constantly. Every text has a timestamp right there on the screen. You do not need a Rolex to know what time it is when you are sending messages. So on one hand we get I don’t recall the time. On the other hand, we get a later effort to obtain documentary confirmation of the time. Apparently she cannot remember what time it was, but she knows it was important enough to chase down a screenshot months later. And let’s circle back to jen… If someone is watching closely enough in the dark to see a passenger door open and, by implication, a dome light activate, then they are watching closely. Close enough to notice light. Movement. A door. But not close enough to have any sense of timing while holding a phone that literally displays the time on its face. Now back to Ryan’s timeline. the story of his night shifts between Trial 1 and Trial 2. In Trial 1, the sequence was CF McCarthy’s, then Hillside Pub across town, then 34 Fairview. In Trial 2, his evening is presented as going from CF McCarthy’s to 34 Fairview. Hillside Pub is not mentioned. Same witness. Same night. Different routing. Then there is the sister issue. In Trial 1, he references his sister being at CF McCarthy’s twice. In Trial 2, he references her there once. But she was already at 34 Fairview. So now we are left asking whether she was ever at McCarthy’s that night, whether he misspoke, or why Hillside quietly disappears the second time around. None of that automatically equals deception. People misspeak. Memories shift. Trials are stressful. But when details appear, disappear, and rearrange themselves depending on which courtroom you are in, it does raise eyebrows. Especially when the original observation was specific enough to include seeing a passenger door open in the dark. Just not what time it was... and where did that pesky screenshot vanish to??????

Dixie Normus

17,499 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

AM Alleged time John was struck in the driveway by Karen’s Lexus. AM Jen McCabe texts John pull behind me in the gar... um driveway." Jen is either at or near the front door of the house. She’s telling John to pull in behind her which implies She doesn’t see an injured man in the snow. She does not see Karen’s vehicle in the process of leaving. Let’s pair her text with the Commonwealth's version If Karen hit John at , Jen would have Seen the aftermath within 4 minutes a man dying in the snow at the end of the property. Higgins’s Jeep was parked in front of the mailbox , directly in the path of Karens reversing vehicle. That makes it almost physically impossible for her to have Gained the speed and angle needed to hit John. Avoided hitting or grazing the Jeep, Not left marks on the Jeep or the mailbox post Jen’s text shows she thought John wasn’t there yet. That alone destroys the timeline of the prosecution. You can’t text someone to park behind you if You already saw them get hit and left in the yard Or if you just saw their girlfriend reverse into them and drive away. You also can’t "miss" a body lying near the end of the yard if you’re standing at the door looking straight at it, unless the entire scene is being fabricated. You can't reconcile Jen’s text her vantage point, and the position of the Jeep with the idea that Karen hit John at . The physics don’t work. The timeline doesn’t work. And the human logic flat-out collapses. If phone data doesn’t lie, then someone else is.

AM Alleged time John was struck in the driveway by Karen’s Lexus. AM Jen McCabe texts John pull behind me in the gar... um driveway." Jen is either at or near the front door of the house. She’s telling John to pull in behind her which implies She doesn’t see an injured man in the snow. She does not see Karen’s vehicle in the process of leaving. Let’s pair her text with the Commonwealth's version If Karen hit John at , Jen would have Seen the aftermath within 4 minutes a man dying in the snow at the end of the property. Higgins’s Jeep was parked in front of the mailbox , directly in the path of Karens reversing vehicle. That makes it almost physically impossible for her to have Gained the speed and angle needed to hit John. Avoided hitting or grazing the Jeep, Not left marks on the Jeep or the mailbox post Jen’s text shows she thought John wasn’t there yet. That alone destroys the timeline of the prosecution. You can’t text someone to park behind you if You already saw them get hit and left in the yard Or if you just saw their girlfriend reverse into them and drive away. You also can’t "miss" a body lying near the end of the yard if you’re standing at the door looking straight at it, unless the entire scene is being fabricated. You can't reconcile Jen’s text her vantage point, and the position of the Jeep with the idea that Karen hit John at . The physics don’t work. The timeline doesn’t work. And the human logic flat-out collapses. If phone data doesn’t lie, then someone else is.

Dixie Normus

50,400 просмотров • 1 год назад

This is why the Colin / Allie pickup story has never sat right with me. In Trial 1, Colin Albert and Allie McCabe both seem very comfortable with the clean parts of the story12:10. Allie was there. Colin came out. It was starting to snow. But then the details that would actually make the story feel real suddenly get blurry. Colin says Allie texted him that she was there. He says he responded “come in.” He says he came out 30 seconds to a minute later. But when asked where Allie’s car was in the driveway, he does not remember. When asked what part of the car he got into, he does not remember. Front passenger seat? “Could have been.” Was anyone else in the car? He does not remember. Was anyone else in the car when she dropped him off? He does not remember. Then Allie says she believes she was in the driveway, on the left side, but she is not entirely sure. She does not remember whether she came from Chapman or Cedarcrest. She does not know which front door Colin came out of. She says “I believe” like she is saying what she is supposed to say, not what she actually remembers. So they both remember the time. They both remember it was starting to snow. But they cannot clearly remember the driveway, the route, the door, the seat, or who was in the car. Now add the new Life360 details, which raise even more questions about Allie’s movements and whether the documentary record actually supports the simple version we were told. At some point, this stops looking like a normal memory gap and starts looking like a story that was built around a timestamp. I am not saying what definitely happened. I am saying the testimony and the data do not line up cleanly enough to just wave it away. If the pickup happened exactly the way they said it did, why are the most basic details so hard to answer?

This is why the Colin / Allie pickup story has never sat right with me. In Trial 1, Colin Albert and Allie McCabe both seem very comfortable with the clean parts of the story12:10. Allie was there. Colin came out. It was starting to snow. But then the details that would actually make the story feel real suddenly get blurry. Colin says Allie texted him that she was there. He says he responded “come in.” He says he came out 30 seconds to a minute later. But when asked where Allie’s car was in the driveway, he does not remember. When asked what part of the car he got into, he does not remember. Front passenger seat? “Could have been.” Was anyone else in the car? He does not remember. Was anyone else in the car when she dropped him off? He does not remember. Then Allie says she believes she was in the driveway, on the left side, but she is not entirely sure. She does not remember whether she came from Chapman or Cedarcrest. She does not know which front door Colin came out of. She says “I believe” like she is saying what she is supposed to say, not what she actually remembers. So they both remember the time. They both remember it was starting to snow. But they cannot clearly remember the driveway, the route, the door, the seat, or who was in the car. Now add the new Life360 details, which raise even more questions about Allie’s movements and whether the documentary record actually supports the simple version we were told. At some point, this stops looking like a normal memory gap and starts looking like a story that was built around a timestamp. I am not saying what definitely happened. I am saying the testimony and the data do not line up cleanly enough to just wave it away. If the pickup happened exactly the way they said it did, why are the most basic details so hard to answer?

Dixie Normus

33,388 просмотров • 27 дней назад

While a family was out shopping together a rude lady parked her car diagonally and when the shoppers returned to their vehicle to try to squeeze in through the tight quarters only then did she open the door to make sure they didn’t “damage her car” when the lady in the white SUV opened the door to address the young ladies tirades first she claimed she was two months pregnant, then she claimed she was second trimester threatening to drag her out of the car if she “tried to injure her baby“ while she was the one that put herself in that position,, I am of the opinion this lady was looking for trouble, little old ladies don’t shoehorn their way into parking places that tight only to struggle exiting the vehicle. what are your thoughts on this situation ?

While a family was out shopping together a rude lady parked her car diagonally and when the shoppers returned to their vehicle to try to squeeze in through the tight quarters only then did she open the door to make sure they didn’t “damage her car” when the lady in the white SUV opened the door to address the young ladies tirades first she claimed she was two months pregnant, then she claimed she was second trimester threatening to drag her out of the car if she “tried to injure her baby“ while she was the one that put herself in that position,, I am of the opinion this lady was looking for trouble, little old ladies don’t shoehorn their way into parking places that tight only to struggle exiting the vehicle. what are your thoughts on this situation ?

MAGA X Times Daily News 🇺🇸

796,855 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Thoughts on Kelly Dever resigning from the BPD: I mean, wouldn’t you? 🤦🏻‍♀️ She told investigators she saw Higgins and the chief lurking around the sallyport when Read’s car was there. For whatever reason, a lot of weirdos wanted in on the Fake CoNsPiRaCy. But the FBI showed her she could NOT have possibly seen them—and that she was NOT at Canton Police Department when Karen Read’s car arrived. They confronted her, and she recanted, blaming it on memory issues. Maybe it was, whatever. Fast forward to trial #2: the defense already knew she had either made it up or was mistaken— yet they still called her, just to keep the circus alive. Watching Karen Read’s Twitter and YouTube PR squad spin it as if Dever was ‘afraid to tell the truth,’ and seeing that cult lap it up while being blatantly gaslit, is absolutely BANANAS. 🤯

Thoughts on Kelly Dever resigning from the BPD: I mean, wouldn’t you? 🤦🏻‍♀️ She told investigators she saw Higgins and the chief lurking around the sallyport when Read’s car was there. For whatever reason, a lot of weirdos wanted in on the Fake CoNsPiRaCy. But the FBI showed her she could NOT have possibly seen them—and that she was NOT at Canton Police Department when Karen Read’s car arrived. They confronted her, and she recanted, blaming it on memory issues. Maybe it was, whatever. Fast forward to trial #2: the defense already knew she had either made it up or was mistaken— yet they still called her, just to keep the circus alive. Watching Karen Read’s Twitter and YouTube PR squad spin it as if Dever was ‘afraid to tell the truth,’ and seeing that cult lap it up while being blatantly gaslit, is absolutely BANANAS. 🤯

Mama Llama

71,607 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Sean Goode’s dashcam gives us another little gift from the “nothing to see here” department. Look at the driveway that morning. The two vehicles on the left clearly haven’t been moved in a while; they're covered in snow. Then, just to the right, you can see Matt McCabe’s vehicle pulled in. Now remember Jen McCabe’s testimony: she looked out the door and texted John to “pull behind me.” Behind where exactly? If Matt and Jen were parked on the left side, the remaining driveway space would’ve been gone. If they were parked where Matt’s vehicle is seen in the morning, same problem. Karen’s Lexus is roughly 16 feet 8 inches long. That SUV was not casually squeezing into that driveway behind anyone like a Matchbox car. So either this was the most optimistic parking suggestion in Canton history… or that text makes absolutely no sense when compared to the actual layout seen on the dash cam footage Jen says when she pulled into the driveway, there was already a car in front of her Okay let’s walk through that like normal human beings with eyes. Option 1 She parks on the LEFT side. If there was a car in front of her, and she pulled in behind it on that left side, then her rear end is basically at the mailbox or close to the street. That driveway space is now fully accounted for. There’s no magical extra 17 feet for Karen’s Lexus to just slide in behind everyone. Option 2: She parks on the RIGHT side. Same claim there’s a car in front of her. But here’s the problem… In the dashcam the next morning we see Matt and Jens vehicle sitting there on the right side and there is no car in front of it. None. Zero. Not “it left early.” Not “it melted with the snow.” Just… gone. So now we’ve got two possibilities: The car Jen says was in front of her never existed in that position, or It existed and somehow disappeared without leaving any trace, while every other vehicle stayed put long enough to collect snow And remember Matt’s vehicle is shown as freshly pulled in in the morning footage. Clean positioning, no evidence of another vehicle having been there ahead of it. At some point this stops being confusion… and starts looking like a story that doesn’t match the environment it supposedly happened in.

Sean Goode’s dashcam gives us another little gift from the “nothing to see here” department. Look at the driveway that morning. The two vehicles on the left clearly haven’t been moved in a while; they're covered in snow. Then, just to the right, you can see Matt McCabe’s vehicle pulled in. Now remember Jen McCabe’s testimony: she looked out the door and texted John to “pull behind me.” Behind where exactly? If Matt and Jen were parked on the left side, the remaining driveway space would’ve been gone. If they were parked where Matt’s vehicle is seen in the morning, same problem. Karen’s Lexus is roughly 16 feet 8 inches long. That SUV was not casually squeezing into that driveway behind anyone like a Matchbox car. So either this was the most optimistic parking suggestion in Canton history… or that text makes absolutely no sense when compared to the actual layout seen on the dash cam footage Jen says when she pulled into the driveway, there was already a car in front of her Okay let’s walk through that like normal human beings with eyes. Option 1 She parks on the LEFT side. If there was a car in front of her, and she pulled in behind it on that left side, then her rear end is basically at the mailbox or close to the street. That driveway space is now fully accounted for. There’s no magical extra 17 feet for Karen’s Lexus to just slide in behind everyone. Option 2: She parks on the RIGHT side. Same claim there’s a car in front of her. But here’s the problem… In the dashcam the next morning we see Matt and Jens vehicle sitting there on the right side and there is no car in front of it. None. Zero. Not “it left early.” Not “it melted with the snow.” Just… gone. So now we’ve got two possibilities: The car Jen says was in front of her never existed in that position, or It existed and somehow disappeared without leaving any trace, while every other vehicle stayed put long enough to collect snow And remember Matt’s vehicle is shown as freshly pulled in in the morning footage. Clean positioning, no evidence of another vehicle having been there ahead of it. At some point this stops being confusion… and starts looking like a story that doesn’t match the environment it supposedly happened in.

Dixie Normus

29,235 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Rember back in Trial 2, years after the fact that Kerry says “We were putting a timeline together at the request of Peggy O’Keefe.” “I was at Jen’s house making a timeline when the two officers showed up… I just happened to be there.” “Jen’s sister Denise was there. Denise was writing it down as we were remembering things.” Oh. Denise was writing it down. Denise was physically in the room. Denise was part of the timeline construction process. Denise is now a core witness to the very first ‘what happened’ narrative. And yet… Jen under oath makes it sound like it was just her and Kerry, desperately trying to “figure out what happened to our friend.” She never says, “Oh yeah, my sister Denise was also there writing the whole thing down… while two officers showed up… while Kerry was on the phone with Proctor… while we were actively constructing a joint narrative.” Not a whisper. Not a mention. Denise apparently took a vow of timeline celibacy. If Denise was taking notes, she's a witness to the creation of the narrative. But somehow magically becomes irrelevant to everyone at the house. If she was there when officers arrived, she SAW who said what. Which means she’s a witness to the early statements… Which means she’s a witness to inconsistencies… Which means she’s a witness to whether Jen’s story evolved. . If she was there when Kerry called Proctor, she’s a witness to THAT too. So she’s not just present, she’s potentially involved in the very structure of the early story coordination. But here’s the most important contradiction: When Jen talks about the timeline, she keeps framing it as: “The two of us were trying to figure out what happened.” Two. Her and Kerry. But Kerry says: DENISE WAS WRITING IT DOWN. You don’t forget the person writing the timeline YOU’RE BEING QUESTIONED ABOUT. Unless… they’re not supposed to exist in that moment.

Rember back in Trial 2, years after the fact that Kerry says “We were putting a timeline together at the request of Peggy O’Keefe.” “I was at Jen’s house making a timeline when the two officers showed up… I just happened to be there.” “Jen’s sister Denise was there. Denise was writing it down as we were remembering things.” Oh. Denise was writing it down. Denise was physically in the room. Denise was part of the timeline construction process. Denise is now a core witness to the very first ‘what happened’ narrative. And yet… Jen under oath makes it sound like it was just her and Kerry, desperately trying to “figure out what happened to our friend.” She never says, “Oh yeah, my sister Denise was also there writing the whole thing down… while two officers showed up… while Kerry was on the phone with Proctor… while we were actively constructing a joint narrative.” Not a whisper. Not a mention. Denise apparently took a vow of timeline celibacy. If Denise was taking notes, she's a witness to the creation of the narrative. But somehow magically becomes irrelevant to everyone at the house. If she was there when officers arrived, she SAW who said what. Which means she’s a witness to the early statements… Which means she’s a witness to inconsistencies… Which means she’s a witness to whether Jen’s story evolved. . If she was there when Kerry called Proctor, she’s a witness to THAT too. So she’s not just present, she’s potentially involved in the very structure of the early story coordination. But here’s the most important contradiction: When Jen talks about the timeline, she keeps framing it as: “The two of us were trying to figure out what happened.” Two. Her and Kerry. But Kerry says: DENISE WAS WRITING IT DOWN. You don’t forget the person writing the timeline YOU’RE BEING QUESTIONED ABOUT. Unless… they’re not supposed to exist in that moment.

Dixie Normus

45,181 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Somebody, anybody look at this. This was Megan’s testimony at trial. 🤣😭😭 She said she didn’t see him do anything because her back was turned. But then she saw him shoot her when he got out of the car🤣 1. How she saw him with her back turned? 2. So now Tory got out of the car? Didn’t she say he climbed across Kelsey, and was half in /half out, standing over the door to shoot? 3. How did he do all that while outside of the car? No jokes. I really want to know😌

Somebody, anybody look at this. This was Megan’s testimony at trial. 🤣😭😭 She said she didn’t see him do anything because her back was turned. But then she saw him shoot her when he got out of the car🤣 1. How she saw him with her back turned? 2. So now Tory got out of the car? Didn’t she say he climbed across Kelsey, and was half in /half out, standing over the door to shoot? 3. How did he do all that while outside of the car? No jokes. I really want to know😌

ComeWithFacts

15,233 просмотров • 1 год назад

John’s niece was just 14 years old when her uncle “JJ” passed away. She testified that she overheard an argument in early January, during which John told Karen their relationship “had run its course.” She also informed the jurors that her uncle had asked Karen to leave the house, but she refused to go and followed her uncle upstairs to his bedroom. When he refused to let Karen into the room, she began banging loudly on the door. During one of their disputes, John’s niece testified that her uncle left the house for a drive to cool off. She recounted hearing Karen on the phone telling John that his niece and nephew were worried about him. This was a blatant lie, as the teen clarified that she hadn’t even known her uncle had left the house until she overheard Karen’s call, and she wasn’t concerned at all up to that point. One has to wonder if this video clip was the time John’s niece was testifying about or if this is simply another glimpse in time where once again Karen had to end every argument in a way that served her own interests, leaving no room for anyone else’s voice. It’s so hard to watch.

John’s niece was just 14 years old when her uncle “JJ” passed away. She testified that she overheard an argument in early January, during which John told Karen their relationship “had run its course.” She also informed the jurors that her uncle had asked Karen to leave the house, but she refused to go and followed her uncle upstairs to his bedroom. When he refused to let Karen into the room, she began banging loudly on the door. During one of their disputes, John’s niece testified that her uncle left the house for a drive to cool off. She recounted hearing Karen on the phone telling John that his niece and nephew were worried about him. This was a blatant lie, as the teen clarified that she hadn’t even known her uncle had left the house until she overheard Karen’s call, and she wasn’t concerned at all up to that point. One has to wonder if this video clip was the time John’s niece was testifying about or if this is simply another glimpse in time where once again Karen had to end every argument in a way that served her own interests, leaving no room for anyone else’s voice. It’s so hard to watch.

Zona Eagle

41,435 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Megan’s documentary In Her Words has to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen. It makes no sense. The anime scene shows Tory walking toward her while she crawls up the street, a detail NEVER mentioned before. In her actual testimony, she said she crawled to the left of the SUV into a driveway and couldn’t recall whether Tory was near the front or back passenger door. She also said on the stand she couldn’t remember which hand Tory was holding the “gun” in, yet for the documentary two years later, she seems to recall. In both her police interview and her Gayle King story, she said Tory never left the vehicle. Yet the anime directly contradicts her sworn testimony. The investigating officer confirmed that no blood was photographed at the scene and no trial evidence supports the injuries shown in the reenactment. Even the wardrobe is wrong. The anime shows her in yellow, the same color Kylie Jenner wore that night, when she was actually wearing a brown/bronze bikini…🙃 She admits in the documentary that she’s arguing and talking shit to him, but on Gayle King she said she didn’t raise her voice too loud… which one is it?! After all these years, proof could have been provided: x-rays, fragments, medical records, therapy notes, recovery documentation. Instead, we get an overly dramatic cartoon that conflicts with every other account she has given 😔 #FreeToryLanez #InHerLies #FreeTory

Megan’s documentary In Her Words has to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen. It makes no sense. The anime scene shows Tory walking toward her while she crawls up the street, a detail NEVER mentioned before. In her actual testimony, she said she crawled to the left of the SUV into a driveway and couldn’t recall whether Tory was near the front or back passenger door. She also said on the stand she couldn’t remember which hand Tory was holding the “gun” in, yet for the documentary two years later, she seems to recall. In both her police interview and her Gayle King story, she said Tory never left the vehicle. Yet the anime directly contradicts her sworn testimony. The investigating officer confirmed that no blood was photographed at the scene and no trial evidence supports the injuries shown in the reenactment. Even the wardrobe is wrong. The anime shows her in yellow, the same color Kylie Jenner wore that night, when she was actually wearing a brown/bronze bikini…🙃 She admits in the documentary that she’s arguing and talking shit to him, but on Gayle King she said she didn’t raise her voice too loud… which one is it?! After all these years, proof could have been provided: x-rays, fragments, medical records, therapy notes, recovery documentation. Instead, we get an overly dramatic cartoon that conflicts with every other account she has given 😔 #FreeToryLanez #InHerLies #FreeTory

Msкαуℓєιgнᵇᵅᵇᵞ☔️💜 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 🇵🇹 🇯🇲

16,344 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

A witness named Ms. Noble provided Ring camera footage of Tyler Robinson’s vehicle to authorities— In her statement, she said the driver appeared BALD and that there were three other people in the car. Defense: Do you remember when the Nobel’s told you that the driver of that vehicle was bald? Witness: I do remember that being In the report, yes. Defense: But you didn’t mention that today when talking about that ring camera, did you? Witness: I did not.. Defense: And did they tell you there were Three other people in the car? Witness: Yes, they believed that was the case. The footage was after midnight on September 11, 2025 — the night after the shooting.

A witness named Ms. Noble provided Ring camera footage of Tyler Robinson’s vehicle to authorities— In her statement, she said the driver appeared BALD and that there were three other people in the car. Defense: Do you remember when the Nobel’s told you that the driver of that vehicle was bald? Witness: I do remember that being In the report, yes. Defense: But you didn’t mention that today when talking about that ring camera, did you? Witness: I did not.. Defense: And did they tell you there were Three other people in the car? Witness: Yes, they believed that was the case. The footage was after midnight on September 11, 2025 — the night after the shooting.

MJTruthUltra

115,138 просмотров • 7 дней назад

No matter where she went she also ran into her ex boyfriend, according to him it was a mere coincidence since they were so in tune and they liked the same things. One day when she was driving, the sun hit her mirror just right and she saw a glimmer of metal behind the mirror. It was an AirTag. That explains how he always knew where she was, now she’s frantic, was he stalking her this whole time, what was his end game? No matter what, should she call the cops, what else should she do, should she mess with him and put in on his mom’s car or leave it at a police station?

Sensitive content

No matter where she went she also ran into her ex boyfriend, according to him it was a mere coincidence since they were so in tune and they liked the same things. One day when she was driving, the sun hit her mirror just right and she saw a glimmer of metal behind the mirror. It was an AirTag. That explains how he always knew where she was, now she’s frantic, was he stalking her this whole time, what was his end game? No matter what, should she call the cops, what else should she do, should she mess with him and put in on his mom’s car or leave it at a police station?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

181,516 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

👀 This woman knocks on her retired neighbor’s door asking what happened to the car that was parked in front of her house. The neighbor tells her it was towed because she thought it was abandoned. The woman explains it was her sister’s car — they went on vacation to Disney World and her sister couldn’t park in front of her own house because her other neighbors park there. She then tells the woman that it’s $500 if she’d like to support that, and when the woman says no she says she’ll see her in small claims court. The video says “Retired Karen Gets Instant Karma,” but I personally think this woman is the real Karen. Who do you think is the Karen here — the woman or the retired neighbor?

👀 This woman knocks on her retired neighbor’s door asking what happened to the car that was parked in front of her house. The neighbor tells her it was towed because she thought it was abandoned. The woman explains it was her sister’s car — they went on vacation to Disney World and her sister couldn’t park in front of her own house because her other neighbors park there. She then tells the woman that it’s $500 if she’d like to support that, and when the woman says no she says she’ll see her in small claims court. The video says “Retired Karen Gets Instant Karma,” but I personally think this woman is the real Karen. Who do you think is the Karen here — the woman or the retired neighbor?

End3of6Days9 (Helen) 🇺🇸

1,790,891 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

JUST IN: Here is the video of Karen Read leaving court after the first day of defense testimony in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read re-trial. Karen lost her motion for a directed verdict and Hank Brennan shined on cross. Karen won't be calling Michael Proctor, although she may not be able to get his text messages into evidence unless he takes the stand during the defense's case. Judge Cannone is expected to issue a ruling on Monday as to whether the defense must call Proctor to the stand in order to introduce his text messages. The defense wants to call Proctor's friends to get the text messages into evidence, but that ran into a hearsay objection from Hank Brennan (and an end-of-day motion hearing on that issue). The defense is unlikely, if they are forced to call Proctor in order to get the texts into evidence, to do so, as Read's lawyers would be forced to ask open-ended questions of Proctor on direct (and Hank Brennan could then ask Proctor leading questions on cross).

JUST IN: Here is the video of Karen Read leaving court after the first day of defense testimony in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read re-trial. Karen lost her motion for a directed verdict and Hank Brennan shined on cross. Karen won't be calling Michael Proctor, although she may not be able to get his text messages into evidence unless he takes the stand during the defense's case. Judge Cannone is expected to issue a ruling on Monday as to whether the defense must call Proctor to the stand in order to introduce his text messages. The defense wants to call Proctor's friends to get the text messages into evidence, but that ran into a hearsay objection from Hank Brennan (and an end-of-day motion hearing on that issue). The defense is unlikely, if they are forced to call Proctor in order to get the texts into evidence, to do so, as Read's lawyers would be forced to ask open-ended questions of Proctor on direct (and Hank Brennan could then ask Proctor leading questions on cross).

Grant Smith Ellis

14,237 просмотров • 1 год назад

What Yannetti explained tonight on Defense Diaries was basically a masterclass in trial strategy. Everyone wanted Proctor on that stand but the how matters. If the defense calls him, Brennan gets a free second closing argument disguised as cross-examination, walking Proctor through every “helpful” point with the witness nodding along. That’s not just risky, it’s handing the Commonwealth a megaphone. Instead, the defense played it clean. They used Proctor’s buddy to authenticate the texts. No theatrics, no backdoor second summation, just the evidence, Proctor’s own words without giving him the platform. It also shows how much the defense learned from Trial #1. They weren’t about to “over-try” the case again or take on burdens that aren’t theirs. Their job wasn’t to prove Karen’s innocence beyond all doubt it was to expose reasonable doubt in the Commonwealth’s case. And they did that without falling into traps. Bottom line: Proctor never testified, but his texts did. And in the end, those texts did more damage than his spin ever could. David Yannetti @Defense_Dia

What Yannetti explained tonight on Defense Diaries was basically a masterclass in trial strategy. Everyone wanted Proctor on that stand but the how matters. If the defense calls him, Brennan gets a free second closing argument disguised as cross-examination, walking Proctor through every “helpful” point with the witness nodding along. That’s not just risky, it’s handing the Commonwealth a megaphone. Instead, the defense played it clean. They used Proctor’s buddy to authenticate the texts. No theatrics, no backdoor second summation, just the evidence, Proctor’s own words without giving him the platform. It also shows how much the defense learned from Trial #1. They weren’t about to “over-try” the case again or take on burdens that aren’t theirs. Their job wasn’t to prove Karen’s innocence beyond all doubt it was to expose reasonable doubt in the Commonwealth’s case. And they did that without falling into traps. Bottom line: Proctor never testified, but his texts did. And in the end, those texts did more damage than his spin ever could. David Yannetti @Defense_Dia

Dixie Normus

51,712 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад