Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Remember the grave concerns that Judge Beverly Cannone had when the Commonwealth falsely and prejudicially represented that “embedded within the bumper to [Karen Read’s] vehicle is pieces of cocktail glass” during pretrial litigation? Me neither. This greatly prejudiced #KarenRead to the public and potential jury pool before she’d ever...

OliviaLambo_'s profile picture

Olivia

28,313 subscribers

48,334 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Здоровье и велнесНовости и политикаОбразование
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

The Commonwealth literally retooled and changed its entire vehicle data analysis & timeline in response to the defense’s theory. They changed their entire accident reconstruction theory AND their vehicle data theory. And this is after already changing it from the first trial. They didn’t turn this over to the defense until a week ago—well into trial already, and over 3 months after they signed their certificate of compliance, affirming that they’d turned over and produced all discovery in accordance with Rule 14. They’re supposed to be pursuing justice, or pursuing the truth. The truth doesn’t change. This is such a brazen, shameless and disgusting display of how corrupt and evil these people are. They’re so shameless that they don’t even care if the whole world is seeing them trying to prosecute an innocent woman using fake evidence. Hank Brennan’s not here for justice. He’s here to protect the Norfolk County DA mob, and lifeguard Judge Beverly Cannone is enabling it. They’re literally showing the world in real time that they’re framing Karen Read. You don’t need to keep changing your case and theory when you’re prosecuting the right person. #KarenRead #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
3:44

The Commonwealth literally retooled and changed its entire vehicle data analysis & timeline in response to the defense’s theory. They changed their entire accident reconstruction theory AND their vehicle data theory. And this is after already changing it from the first trial. They didn’t turn this over to the defense until a week ago—well into trial already, and over 3 months after they signed their certificate of compliance, affirming that they’d turned over and produced all discovery in accordance with Rule 14. They’re supposed to be pursuing justice, or pursuing the truth. The truth doesn’t change. This is such a brazen, shameless and disgusting display of how corrupt and evil these people are. They’re so shameless that they don’t even care if the whole world is seeing them trying to prosecute an innocent woman using fake evidence. Hank Brennan’s not here for justice. He’s here to protect the Norfolk County DA mob, and lifeguard Judge Beverly Cannone is enabling it. They’re literally showing the world in real time that they’re framing Karen Read. You don’t need to keep changing your case and theory when you’re prosecuting the right person. #KarenRead #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

74,923 просмотров • 1 год назад

Dr. Marie Russell makes a fantastic point about how on John O’Keefe’s right arm sweatshirt sleeve, the fibers at the puncture holes are coming outward, signifying that the entry object that caused the holes in the sleeve & the corresponding wounds on John’s arm, also exited or pulled out of the sleeve. This observation is highly characteristic of wounds caused by dog bites through a sleeve. However, this would not occur as the result of taillight, or any object for that matter, shattering onto John O’Keefe’s arm—as in that case, the shattered taillight pieces wouldn’t pull out or “exit” from the fabric like dog teeth would. This was the Commonwealth’s theory for the causation of injury, or the wounds on John O’Keefe’s right arm. Thoroughly debunked by Dr. Marie Russell. See evidence exhibits attached displaying the punctate holes with their fibers pulling outward from John O’Keefe’s sweatshirt sleeves. #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup
0:47

Dr. Marie Russell makes a fantastic point about how on John O’Keefe’s right arm sweatshirt sleeve, the fibers at the puncture holes are coming outward, signifying that the entry object that caused the holes in the sleeve & the corresponding wounds on John’s arm, also exited or pulled out of the sleeve. This observation is highly characteristic of wounds caused by dog bites through a sleeve. However, this would not occur as the result of taillight, or any object for that matter, shattering onto John O’Keefe’s arm—as in that case, the shattered taillight pieces wouldn’t pull out or “exit” from the fabric like dog teeth would. This was the Commonwealth’s theory for the causation of injury, or the wounds on John O’Keefe’s right arm. Thoroughly debunked by Dr. Marie Russell. See evidence exhibits attached displaying the punctate holes with their fibers pulling outward from John O’Keefe’s sweatshirt sleeves. #KarenRead #KarenReadTrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup

Olivia

39,210 просмотров • 1 год назад

Dr. Judson Welcher performed the finger arm painting experiment 3 times. Hank asks: “In any of those three times did it ever leave paint on the underside of your arm or forearm?” Dr. Judson Welcher: “No.” Is the Commonwealth alleging that paint is what caused John O’Keefe’s arm injuries, and not the spontaneous, disorganized explosion of taillight? I was unaware that paint and taillight have the same physical properties. Riveting! #Aperture #KarenRead #JudsonWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
0:20

Dr. Judson Welcher performed the finger arm painting experiment 3 times. Hank asks: “In any of those three times did it ever leave paint on the underside of your arm or forearm?” Dr. Judson Welcher: “No.” Is the Commonwealth alleging that paint is what caused John O’Keefe’s arm injuries, and not the spontaneous, disorganized explosion of taillight? I was unaware that paint and taillight have the same physical properties. Riveting! #Aperture #KarenRead #JudsonWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

19,848 просмотров • 1 год назад

Judge Beverly Cannone is violating #KarenRead’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury by refusing to allow the very standard & typical practice of jury voir dire of the jury venire by the attorneys. Yesterday, Brother Counsel had his Brother Counsel, a national trial attorney who’s litigated in 25 states, on his show to get his fresh perspective on legal matters in the Karen Read case. I highly recommend checking out this show over on his YouTube channel (linked below). They discussed this issue of how the Judge isn’t allowing panel voir dire, or for the attorneys to be able to ask questions of prospective jurors to ensure the selection of a fair and impartial jury. Attorney Salomon advised that immediately after a jury’s empaneled and selection’s complete, he’d move for a mistrial, stating how the Judge is not allowing the defendant to have a fair trial, did not allow the attorneys to voir dire the jurors, and as a result, neither the defense attorneys, nor the prosecutor, nor the Judge has any clue whether they actually have a fair jury. I found Judge Cannone’s refusal to allow panel voir dire of the jury at the first trial troubling, and am once again troubled by this decision for the second trial. Judge Cannone has gone out of her way to acknowledge the extensive media coverage of and public interest in this case, and the effects that might have on Karen Read’s right to a fair trial and impartial jury. In fact, she recently issued a gag order with the expressed purposes of apparently trying to protect Karen Read’s right to a fair and impartial jury and trial. So my question is, if Judge Cannone truly cared about Karen Read’s right to an impartial jury and a fair trial, then why is she refusing to protect that right when it counts most—during the actual jury selection process? In a case with so much pretrial publicity—as repeatedly acknowledged by the Judge—it seems like the necessity of robust and effective jury voir dire by counsel is all the more imperative in ensuring Karen Read’s Sixth Amendment rights. These are the decisions that make it hard not to be left with the impression that Judge Cannone doesn’t actually care about Karen Read’s right to a fair trial or impartial jury, because if she did then she’d allow that to be possible through jury selection. These are the decisions that make it hard not to view Judge Cannone’s gag order as completely disingenuous when she says it’s in the name of protecting Karen Read’s rights to an impartial jury and fair trial, because if she really cared about that then she’d allow the attorneys to voir dire prospective jurors. In the end, it appears as though Cannone is only eager to exploit the whole facade of wanting to protect Read’s rights when it allows her to make decisions that further tie Karen Read and defense counsel’s hands behind their backs, but not when it *actually* counts. What say you? Should the defense move for a mistrial immediately upon the completion of jury selection? Do we really trust Judge Beverly Cannone to weed out any biased or partial jurors? #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
1:46

Judge Beverly Cannone is violating #KarenRead’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury by refusing to allow the very standard & typical practice of jury voir dire of the jury venire by the attorneys. Yesterday, Brother Counsel had his Brother Counsel, a national trial attorney who’s litigated in 25 states, on his show to get his fresh perspective on legal matters in the Karen Read case. I highly recommend checking out this show over on his YouTube channel (linked below). They discussed this issue of how the Judge isn’t allowing panel voir dire, or for the attorneys to be able to ask questions of prospective jurors to ensure the selection of a fair and impartial jury. Attorney Salomon advised that immediately after a jury’s empaneled and selection’s complete, he’d move for a mistrial, stating how the Judge is not allowing the defendant to have a fair trial, did not allow the attorneys to voir dire the jurors, and as a result, neither the defense attorneys, nor the prosecutor, nor the Judge has any clue whether they actually have a fair jury. I found Judge Cannone’s refusal to allow panel voir dire of the jury at the first trial troubling, and am once again troubled by this decision for the second trial. Judge Cannone has gone out of her way to acknowledge the extensive media coverage of and public interest in this case, and the effects that might have on Karen Read’s right to a fair trial and impartial jury. In fact, she recently issued a gag order with the expressed purposes of apparently trying to protect Karen Read’s right to a fair and impartial jury and trial. So my question is, if Judge Cannone truly cared about Karen Read’s right to an impartial jury and a fair trial, then why is she refusing to protect that right when it counts most—during the actual jury selection process? In a case with so much pretrial publicity—as repeatedly acknowledged by the Judge—it seems like the necessity of robust and effective jury voir dire by counsel is all the more imperative in ensuring Karen Read’s Sixth Amendment rights. These are the decisions that make it hard not to be left with the impression that Judge Cannone doesn’t actually care about Karen Read’s right to a fair trial or impartial jury, because if she did then she’d allow that to be possible through jury selection. These are the decisions that make it hard not to view Judge Cannone’s gag order as completely disingenuous when she says it’s in the name of protecting Karen Read’s rights to an impartial jury and fair trial, because if she really cared about that then she’d allow the attorneys to voir dire prospective jurors. In the end, it appears as though Cannone is only eager to exploit the whole facade of wanting to protect Read’s rights when it allows her to make decisions that further tie Karen Read and defense counsel’s hands behind their backs, but not when it *actually* counts. What say you? Should the defense move for a mistrial immediately upon the completion of jury selection? Do we really trust Judge Beverly Cannone to weed out any biased or partial jurors? #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

43,273 просмотров • 1 год назад

The shattered glass that was on the bumper was consistent with the one piece of glass that Proctor says he found in the road. That glass did NOT match the cocktail glass or the broken pieces of the cocktail glass found next to John. So where did the extra mystery glass from the bumper and the road come from?
1:32

The shattered glass that was on the bumper was consistent with the one piece of glass that Proctor says he found in the road. That glass did NOT match the cocktail glass or the broken pieces of the cocktail glass found next to John. So where did the extra mystery glass from the bumper and the road come from?

The Trial Channel

25,813 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

So now is the Commonwealth trying to attribute John O’Keefe’s head injuries to the spoiler, or “wing”, of Karen Read’s SUV? Funny how Hank Brennan has had multiple medical doctors on the stand, including the medical examiner that conducted John O’Keefe’s autopsy, and not once did he ask them if any part of Karen’s vehicle, including the spoiler, could cause the injuries John sustained. Apparently it’s the throw-sh*t-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks prosecution! Who needs proof beyond a reasonable doubt? #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
0:33

So now is the Commonwealth trying to attribute John O’Keefe’s head injuries to the spoiler, or “wing”, of Karen Read’s SUV? Funny how Hank Brennan has had multiple medical doctors on the stand, including the medical examiner that conducted John O’Keefe’s autopsy, and not once did he ask them if any part of Karen’s vehicle, including the spoiler, could cause the injuries John sustained. Apparently it’s the throw-sh*t-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks prosecution! Who needs proof beyond a reasonable doubt? #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

24,087 просмотров • 1 год назад

The defense introduced a flow chart yesterday at trial that vastly simplified & clarified the otherwise impossible to follow evidence for the jury. It made clear exactly what evidence was planted as it related to the mismatched sources of broken glass. The Commonwealth kept this from the jury at the first trial, however, because their entire approach has been to baffle with BS, and muddy the waters on things no prosecutor ever questions, like Cellebrite, for instance. Here, the defense put together a visual aid for jurors to understand the origins and discovery of multiple pieces of evidence found at the scene and on Karen Read’s bumper. The Commonwealth, however, would rather refer to these pieces of evidence by different numbers because this of course makes it harder for anyone to realize that one category of evidence doesn’t fit, signifying it was therefore planted. By referring to them as nondescript numbers, the Commonwealth was able to obfuscate the truth from the jury. I remember at the first trial seeing this flow chart—now a demonstrative successfully admitted into evidence this time around—in Attorney Alan Jackson’s binder as he conducted his cross examination of lab tech Christina Hanley, and thinking how helpful it would’ve been for the jurors to clearly understand that evidence (picture attached below). As you may recall, the Commonwealth objected to the admission of the flowchart into evidence at the first trial because they want to keep the truth from the jury. And they were successful. In a one-on-one interview after the first trial with journalist Ted Daniel, Karen Read explains the frustration surrounding this evidence and trying to get this exhibit admitted to better assist the jury in their understanding of it. Finally, this time around, the defense was successful in getting more truth through to the jury. #KarenRead #HankBrennan #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
1:37

The defense introduced a flow chart yesterday at trial that vastly simplified & clarified the otherwise impossible to follow evidence for the jury. It made clear exactly what evidence was planted as it related to the mismatched sources of broken glass. The Commonwealth kept this from the jury at the first trial, however, because their entire approach has been to baffle with BS, and muddy the waters on things no prosecutor ever questions, like Cellebrite, for instance. Here, the defense put together a visual aid for jurors to understand the origins and discovery of multiple pieces of evidence found at the scene and on Karen Read’s bumper. The Commonwealth, however, would rather refer to these pieces of evidence by different numbers because this of course makes it harder for anyone to realize that one category of evidence doesn’t fit, signifying it was therefore planted. By referring to them as nondescript numbers, the Commonwealth was able to obfuscate the truth from the jury. I remember at the first trial seeing this flow chart—now a demonstrative successfully admitted into evidence this time around—in Attorney Alan Jackson’s binder as he conducted his cross examination of lab tech Christina Hanley, and thinking how helpful it would’ve been for the jurors to clearly understand that evidence (picture attached below). As you may recall, the Commonwealth objected to the admission of the flowchart into evidence at the first trial because they want to keep the truth from the jury. And they were successful. In a one-on-one interview after the first trial with journalist Ted Daniel, Karen Read explains the frustration surrounding this evidence and trying to get this exhibit admitted to better assist the jury in their understanding of it. Finally, this time around, the defense was successful in getting more truth through to the jury. #KarenRead #HankBrennan #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

45,341 просмотров • 1 год назад

Well this is a level of creepy I wasn’t anticipating. Not only did the Commonwealth’s accident reconstructionist, Jud Welcher, buy the same whole damn car as Karen Read’s, he also bought the same make and model jeans, sneakers, t-shirt, sweatshirt and hat that John O’Keefe was wearing the night he was killed. Then he put those clothes, shoes and hat on and stood next to the new Lexus they purchased. I’m sure the fibers of John O’Keefe’s shirt also caused the principles of physics and gravity to be suspended that night. That ought to persuade the jury! #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
2:02

Well this is a level of creepy I wasn’t anticipating. Not only did the Commonwealth’s accident reconstructionist, Jud Welcher, buy the same whole damn car as Karen Read’s, he also bought the same make and model jeans, sneakers, t-shirt, sweatshirt and hat that John O’Keefe was wearing the night he was killed. Then he put those clothes, shoes and hat on and stood next to the new Lexus they purchased. I’m sure the fibers of John O’Keefe’s shirt also caused the principles of physics and gravity to be suspended that night. That ought to persuade the jury! #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

75,242 просмотров • 1 год назад

KAREN READ & THE DECEITFUL DEFENSE: THE STORY OF THE GLASSES During Read's first trial, one of the head scratchers for everyone following the case was the glass on the bumper that did not match the cocktail glass John O'Keefe had walked out of the Waterfall with as seen on video. We were all left wondering where it came from. In closing arguments, Alan Jackson attempted to get the jury and the public to believe that the glass was planted by Michael Proctor. However, Alan knew at the time he made these statements the glass likely came from the full vodka soda Karen admitted was in her car. Jackson had willingly participated with Read in the ID documentary and in the first episode which contained footage prior to trial Read detailed how John got out of the car with that vodka soda glass & Jackson surely knew where that glass was from. Everything the defense has said in this case is a twisted version of half truths and lies they are well aware are untrue.
0:12

KAREN READ & THE DECEITFUL DEFENSE: THE STORY OF THE GLASSES During Read's first trial, one of the head scratchers for everyone following the case was the glass on the bumper that did not match the cocktail glass John O'Keefe had walked out of the Waterfall with as seen on video. We were all left wondering where it came from. In closing arguments, Alan Jackson attempted to get the jury and the public to believe that the glass was planted by Michael Proctor. However, Alan knew at the time he made these statements the glass likely came from the full vodka soda Karen admitted was in her car. Jackson had willingly participated with Read in the ID documentary and in the first episode which contained footage prior to trial Read detailed how John got out of the car with that vodka soda glass & Jackson surely knew where that glass was from. Everything the defense has said in this case is a twisted version of half truths and lies they are well aware are untrue.

Julie Carpenter

17,097 просмотров • 1 год назад

Robert Alessi is going to absolutely dismantle Jud Welcher tomorrow. Jud actually thought that suggesting the laceration on John’s eyelid was caused by the spoiler, or “wing”, on the back of Karen Read’s SUV, was a good idea. He also seems to be suggesting that the half centimeter abrasion on John’s right lateral knee corresponded to the scuff marks on the rear bumper. In order for either, or both, of these things to be true, this would require John O’Keefe to have been hit—not sideswiped or “clipped”—by the back of Karen’s vehicle. He would’ve had fractures and bruising up and down his body. There were none below the head. He would’ve had bumper marks on his legs. There were none. He also would’ve likely been mowed down and completely run over by her vehicle. He was not. #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
1:33

Robert Alessi is going to absolutely dismantle Jud Welcher tomorrow. Jud actually thought that suggesting the laceration on John’s eyelid was caused by the spoiler, or “wing”, on the back of Karen Read’s SUV, was a good idea. He also seems to be suggesting that the half centimeter abrasion on John’s right lateral knee corresponded to the scuff marks on the rear bumper. In order for either, or both, of these things to be true, this would require John O’Keefe to have been hit—not sideswiped or “clipped”—by the back of Karen’s vehicle. He would’ve had fractures and bruising up and down his body. There were none below the head. He would’ve had bumper marks on his legs. There were none. He also would’ve likely been mowed down and completely run over by her vehicle. He was not. #KarenRead #JudWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

44,537 просмотров • 1 год назад

Judge Beverly Cannone has ruled that Dr. Judson Welcher can testify that the data he analyzed + the damage to Karen Read’s SUV is consistent with her vehicle being in a collision. Additionally, he can testify that Mr. O’Keefe’s injuries are consistent with having been struck by an SUV that’s physically identical to Karen Read’s Lexus “because this opinion is based upon, among other things, his experimental work that came into evidence without objection as to scientific methodology and application.” ——— This is just patently false. The defense, specifically Attorney Robert Alessi, has objected numerous times on the record to the admissibility of Dr. Judson’s Welcher’s opinions and testimony, based on his scientific methodology, or lack thereof, among other things. In fact, I’ve attached the defense’s Motion In Limine—just one of the motions they filed, and argued in court, opposing the admissibility of Welcher’s testimony—filed on March 27, 2025. In this, among other defense filings on this matter, the defense raised several of the issues which have caused great interruptions, disturbances, and distractions to testimony in the middle of trial, and would’ve much more appropriately been handled pretrial. Further, Robert Alessi made a strong record yesterday in court, so it’s not entirely clear where Judge Bev is getting the notion that there was no objection by defense counsel. ——— See defense’s Motion In Limine to Exclude the Testimony of Commonwealth's Witness Dr. Judson Welcher, and request for voir dire, as filed March 27, 2025 (attached + continued in comments). #Aperture #KarenRead #JudsonWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
0:47

Judge Beverly Cannone has ruled that Dr. Judson Welcher can testify that the data he analyzed + the damage to Karen Read’s SUV is consistent with her vehicle being in a collision. Additionally, he can testify that Mr. O’Keefe’s injuries are consistent with having been struck by an SUV that’s physically identical to Karen Read’s Lexus “because this opinion is based upon, among other things, his experimental work that came into evidence without objection as to scientific methodology and application.” ——— This is just patently false. The defense, specifically Attorney Robert Alessi, has objected numerous times on the record to the admissibility of Dr. Judson’s Welcher’s opinions and testimony, based on his scientific methodology, or lack thereof, among other things. In fact, I’ve attached the defense’s Motion In Limine—just one of the motions they filed, and argued in court, opposing the admissibility of Welcher’s testimony—filed on March 27, 2025. In this, among other defense filings on this matter, the defense raised several of the issues which have caused great interruptions, disturbances, and distractions to testimony in the middle of trial, and would’ve much more appropriately been handled pretrial. Further, Robert Alessi made a strong record yesterday in court, so it’s not entirely clear where Judge Bev is getting the notion that there was no objection by defense counsel. ——— See defense’s Motion In Limine to Exclude the Testimony of Commonwealth's Witness Dr. Judson Welcher, and request for voir dire, as filed March 27, 2025 (attached + continued in comments). #Aperture #KarenRead #JudsonWelcher #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #KarenReadRetrial #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

23,166 просмотров • 1 год назад

#KarenReadRetrial RENTSCHLER'S CONFOUNDING ADMISSION During a contentious line of questioning yesterday with Hank Brennan, Dr. Andrew Rentschler admitted that he knew the Commonwealth's theory of the case BEFORE he testified during trial Read's initial trial. For any other defense expert witness in any other trial it would be expected for the expert to have an understanding of the prosecution's theory, but not so in this one. Due to the circumstances in which ARCCA's initial involvement began through a separate investigation by the federal government, the parameters of what ARCCA could discuss with the defense were limited. So too were the materials ARCCA received from the federal investigators which did NOT include the theory of the case: Trooper Paul's reconstruction. Prior to the retrial we learned of the murky relationship ARCCA had with the defense including that they were not "independent", they had received compensation, and they had deleted their communications. We also learned that both Daniel Wolfe and Andrew Rentschler were receiving information from federal investigators in violation of a sequestration order during the first trial. Rentschler characterized the information they received during the trial as "evidence" under oath yesterday and stated it didn't change his opinion or analysis because he already knew the theory of the case. This leads to some serious questions: 1. WHO gave Rentschler the prosecution's theory? As per the materials listed in ARCCA's initial report he did not receive it from federal investigators. 2. WHEN did Rentschler receive the theory of the case? Based on his testimony under oath yesterday it was prior to the inception of trial one. 3. WHAT theory were they given? Was it generalized as a pedestrian collision or detailed as a sideswipe event? 4. HOW especially if only a generalized theory was given did additional information and evidence not have an effect on analysis or opinion? 5. WHY if he had the theory of the case would he choose to engage in and testify about testing two hypotheses that had nothing to the theory of the case? ARCCA tested whether or not throwing a glass could break the taillight and whether the head injury came from contact with the taillight, neither of which were even suggested in the prosecution's theory of a sideswipe and fall backwards. Add to this Rentschler's ludicrous statements yesterday about the insignificance of the DNA, the debris field and the taillight fragments embedded in John's clothes, and ARCCA's involvement in this case becomes even shadier. Time for US Attorneys office to shed some light on what really happened here.
0:42

#KarenReadRetrial RENTSCHLER'S CONFOUNDING ADMISSION During a contentious line of questioning yesterday with Hank Brennan, Dr. Andrew Rentschler admitted that he knew the Commonwealth's theory of the case BEFORE he testified during trial Read's initial trial. For any other defense expert witness in any other trial it would be expected for the expert to have an understanding of the prosecution's theory, but not so in this one. Due to the circumstances in which ARCCA's initial involvement began through a separate investigation by the federal government, the parameters of what ARCCA could discuss with the defense were limited. So too were the materials ARCCA received from the federal investigators which did NOT include the theory of the case: Trooper Paul's reconstruction. Prior to the retrial we learned of the murky relationship ARCCA had with the defense including that they were not "independent", they had received compensation, and they had deleted their communications. We also learned that both Daniel Wolfe and Andrew Rentschler were receiving information from federal investigators in violation of a sequestration order during the first trial. Rentschler characterized the information they received during the trial as "evidence" under oath yesterday and stated it didn't change his opinion or analysis because he already knew the theory of the case. This leads to some serious questions: 1. WHO gave Rentschler the prosecution's theory? As per the materials listed in ARCCA's initial report he did not receive it from federal investigators. 2. WHEN did Rentschler receive the theory of the case? Based on his testimony under oath yesterday it was prior to the inception of trial one. 3. WHAT theory were they given? Was it generalized as a pedestrian collision or detailed as a sideswipe event? 4. HOW especially if only a generalized theory was given did additional information and evidence not have an effect on analysis or opinion? 5. WHY if he had the theory of the case would he choose to engage in and testify about testing two hypotheses that had nothing to the theory of the case? ARCCA tested whether or not throwing a glass could break the taillight and whether the head injury came from contact with the taillight, neither of which were even suggested in the prosecution's theory of a sideswipe and fall backwards. Add to this Rentschler's ludicrous statements yesterday about the insignificance of the DNA, the debris field and the taillight fragments embedded in John's clothes, and ARCCA's involvement in this case becomes even shadier. Time for US Attorneys office to shed some light on what really happened here.

Julie Carpenter

15,224 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨🚨 Juror in #RobertRoberson’s trial just testified that she now believes he is INNOCENT, that the entire case against him was 'shaken baby syndrome' - not beating - and that the jury did not have all the evidence. I keep being told to believe the jury. So I went and found an actual juror from 2003. She couldn’t wait to testify. Here’s what she had to say: Fact: this was ONLY a shaken baby case. Fact: the prosecution never gave evidence that Nikki was beaten. Fact: the jury knew nothing about the severity of Nikki’s illness and her extensive history of illness. Fact: the jury did NOT hear everything they needed to in order to make a correct decision in this case. Fact: this juror, having learned the new scientific evidence, now believes Robert is INNOCENT and would NOT have voted to convict. I believe this juror, who knows more about the trial than those opining on Twitter. Justice demands a new trial. Watch 👇 #txlege
36:28

🚨🚨 Juror in #RobertRoberson’s trial just testified that she now believes he is INNOCENT, that the entire case against him was 'shaken baby syndrome' - not beating - and that the jury did not have all the evidence. I keep being told to believe the jury. So I went and found an actual juror from 2003. She couldn’t wait to testify. Here’s what she had to say: Fact: this was ONLY a shaken baby case. Fact: the prosecution never gave evidence that Nikki was beaten. Fact: the jury knew nothing about the severity of Nikki’s illness and her extensive history of illness. Fact: the jury did NOT hear everything they needed to in order to make a correct decision in this case. Fact: this juror, having learned the new scientific evidence, now believes Robert is INNOCENT and would NOT have voted to convict. I believe this juror, who knows more about the trial than those opining on Twitter. Justice demands a new trial. Watch 👇 #txlege

Brian Harrison

26,944 просмотров • 1 год назад

Remember when Adam Lally stated this in court before the first trial? We all know that they were investigating the investigators. The Feds gave their findings to Judge Cannone, The NCDAO and KR Defense Attorneys. Adam Lally was correct when he said the investigation was started by the defense. The investigation is over and the Feds didn’t come to save Karen Read. Does anyone believe that the Feds would let Karen Read go to trial, not once but twice.
1:07

Remember when Adam Lally stated this in court before the first trial? We all know that they were investigating the investigators. The Feds gave their findings to Judge Cannone, The NCDAO and KR Defense Attorneys. Adam Lally was correct when he said the investigation was started by the defense. The investigation is over and the Feds didn’t come to save Karen Read. Does anyone believe that the Feds would let Karen Read go to trial, not once but twice.

Elaine S

18,033 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Maureen Hartnett has never in her career had to conduct testing on blood samples that were stored in red solo cups, and additionally confirms that despite collecting said samples of apparent blood found at the scene, the Commonwealth did not pursue any further testing of said samples to determine if they were in fact blood, and if so, who the blood belonged to. In other words, we will never know how many potential contributors to said blood samples there were. #KarenRead #MaureenHartnett #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
0:46

Maureen Hartnett has never in her career had to conduct testing on blood samples that were stored in red solo cups, and additionally confirms that despite collecting said samples of apparent blood found at the scene, the Commonwealth did not pursue any further testing of said samples to determine if they were in fact blood, and if so, who the blood belonged to. In other words, we will never know how many potential contributors to said blood samples there were. #KarenRead #MaureenHartnett #FreeKarenRead #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadTrial2 #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

29,679 просмотров • 1 год назад

The majority of the new “evidence” the Commonwealth has obtained in its case against #KarenRead since the first trial consists of clips of statements made in various interviews she’s given. The funny thing is, every time they play a clip, they’ll be highlighting to the jury how they didn’t record ANY of the interviews in Officer John O’Keefe’s murder investigation. What kind of impression would that leave with you, in terms of the reliability of the state’s evidence and case, that they either couldn’t even be bothered to, or deliberately avoided recording police interviews in the investigation of a murdered Police Officer? But journalists and reporters simply interviewing individuals for news segments DID record and maintained said recordings of their interviews? #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe
0:26

The majority of the new “evidence” the Commonwealth has obtained in its case against #KarenRead since the first trial consists of clips of statements made in various interviews she’s given. The funny thing is, every time they play a clip, they’ll be highlighting to the jury how they didn’t record ANY of the interviews in Officer John O’Keefe’s murder investigation. What kind of impression would that leave with you, in terms of the reliability of the state’s evidence and case, that they either couldn’t even be bothered to, or deliberately avoided recording police interviews in the investigation of a murdered Police Officer? But journalists and reporters simply interviewing individuals for news segments DID record and maintained said recordings of their interviews? #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

44,523 просмотров • 1 год назад

"Come on.. you can't be that dumb", Kerry Roberts proclaims as she attempts to explain how silly it sounds for the cocktail glass to have been found by John O'Keefe. You're right Kerry, it's ridiculous. It's ridiculous to think the same hand that supposedly received a direct hit with an SUV (that had received no injuries from this very hit) somehow managed to grasp this cocktail glass as it broke. This same body then did a spin, with the broken glass in hand, got launched 10 feet, and said glass landed right next to the body. Or does it make more sense that a body holding a cocktail glass received a strike on the back of the head and the glass broke as the hand released the grip on the glass as the body fell. This wouldn't be the first murder where evidence was placed to look staged. Riddle me this Kerry... Is this why, til this very day, the entirety of the glass has never been found? Is this why the glass on the bumper did not match? Or the majority of the glass at the scene did not match? Where's the rest of the glass, Kerry?
0:22

"Come on.. you can't be that dumb", Kerry Roberts proclaims as she attempts to explain how silly it sounds for the cocktail glass to have been found by John O'Keefe. You're right Kerry, it's ridiculous. It's ridiculous to think the same hand that supposedly received a direct hit with an SUV (that had received no injuries from this very hit) somehow managed to grasp this cocktail glass as it broke. This same body then did a spin, with the broken glass in hand, got launched 10 feet, and said glass landed right next to the body. Or does it make more sense that a body holding a cocktail glass received a strike on the back of the head and the glass broke as the hand released the grip on the glass as the body fell. This wouldn't be the first murder where evidence was placed to look staged. Riddle me this Kerry... Is this why, til this very day, the entirety of the glass has never been found? Is this why the glass on the bumper did not match? Or the majority of the glass at the scene did not match? Where's the rest of the glass, Kerry?

BoozeyBeauty

39,498 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

JUST IN: Here is the dramatic moment when jurors in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read re-trial were shown the actual broken cocktail glass that was found on the lawn, next to John. This glass was found at the exact location where Karen dropped John off, while he held that glass, before allegedly striking John with her car, while drunk, and then leaving John to die in a blizzard from a head jury (after falling to the ground when being struck by the car, which was going 24.2mph n reverse per vehicle data) and hypothermia. Earlier, jurors heard testimony that Karen confessed to hitting John, three times, after being asked by Firefighter Kate McLaughlin if John had suffered any trauma in the time period before he died. Watch video of that testimony here - Watch live as afternoon testimony continues, chat with the towel friends, and see special Towel MultiCam coverage --including the world famous Karen Cam-- via this link -
4:13

JUST IN: Here is the dramatic moment when jurors in the John O'Keefe and Karen Read re-trial were shown the actual broken cocktail glass that was found on the lawn, next to John. This glass was found at the exact location where Karen dropped John off, while he held that glass, before allegedly striking John with her car, while drunk, and then leaving John to die in a blizzard from a head jury (after falling to the ground when being struck by the car, which was going 24.2mph n reverse per vehicle data) and hypothermia. Earlier, jurors heard testimony that Karen confessed to hitting John, three times, after being asked by Firefighter Kate McLaughlin if John had suffered any trauma in the time period before he died. Watch video of that testimony here - Watch live as afternoon testimony continues, chat with the towel friends, and see special Towel MultiCam coverage --including the world famous Karen Cam-- via this link -

Grant Smith Ellis

24,337 просмотров • 1 год назад