Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Someone replied “There is a thing called time. One picture at one time doesn’t show another.” So I went back and reviewed all C.F. McCarthy’s footage shown at trial. During MSP Yuri Bukhenik’s and other witness testimony, video was played from Aprox 7:30 PM to just after 10:30 PM....

14,415 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

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

Get ready to dive into several witness accounts and see what investigators could have looked at to verify their statements but simply failed to do. Take Ryan Nagel’s testimony...he stated on two separate occasions that he and friends went to C.F. McCarthy’s to meet his sister around 7 or 8 p.m., stayed for a few hours, and then went to the Hillside. On its face, that sounds straightforward. But his own sister’s whereabouts contradicted the story she wasn’t at C.F. McCarthy’s at all, she was at 34 Fairview, having been driven there by their father. Here’s the critical point: the police had surveillance video from C.F. McCarthy’s. This was objective evidence that could have confirmed or refuted Nagel’s version of events. Yet there is no indication that investigators ever cross-checked his statements against the footage. And this is not an isolated instance. Across multiple witnesses, from bars to restaurants to neighborhoods, video surveillance existed, hard data that could have either supported or dismantled narratives. Instead of using these neutral, verifiable sources, the investigation funneled all of its focus into building a case against Karen Read. In doing so, investigators treated testimony not as claims to be tested against evidence, but as facts to be absorbed without scrutiny. The result? A case that leans on selective trust rather than rigorous verification. If the truth matters and it always should, then ignoring surveillance footage while relying on inconsistent human recollection isn’t just sloppy work. It’s a dereliction of duty. Don't worry, we will soon have a deeper dive into chris and Julie collin and Allie testimony and see what investigators could have looked at but didn't.

Dixie Normus

14,704 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Julie… Julie… Julie. Chris Albert and his wife initially told Yuri that they had followed to 34 Fairview Road after being at the Waterfall. But when the first trial began, that narrative shifted. Suddenly, Julie testified that she drove her own vehicle to 34 Fairview to pick up her sister, Coco, and Coco’s daughter Caitlin, before heading to the Waterfall for dinner and drinks. That version isn’t even consistent within their own family. Caitlin stated she and her boyfriend drove from Easton directly to the Waterfall...not with Julie. Det. Tully, “the great detective” we’re told, had full access to surveillance from the Waterfall. He could have easily confirmed who arrived, who left, and at what times. Additionally at trial, Julie testified she left shortly after John and Karen arrived. Chris, meanwhile, usually locks up D&E Pizza through the back door where his vehicle is normally parked behind the building. But after 12:14 a.m. the moment he’s seen approaching the Waterfall exit there is no video evidence at all of Chris’s whereabouts. Did Julie really go home when she said she did? Did Chris actually drive to work, park behind D&E, and then head to 34 Fairview with everyone else? We’ll never know because Tully never sought surveillance from any of the other businesses or cameras along Washington Street. Instead, the investigation wore blinders, aimed at only one person from the start.

Dixie Normus

35,919 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Why is ADA Adam Lally so fixated on the time 8:22am, and specifically where Sergeant Yuri Bukhenik & Lead Investigator Michael Proctor were at 8:22am on January 29, 2022, and what they were doing at that time? Lally asks Bukhenik & Proctor: “Whereabouts were you at about 8:22 in the morning?” (see replies below) ——— BUKHENIK REPLIES: “At 8:22am, I would say I was still blowing the snow out of my driveway, clearing the path for my truck to leave the driveway.” ——— PROCTOR REPLIES: “Home.” LALLY ASKS: “Had you shoveled out of your driveway at that time?” PROCTOR REPLIES: “Not yet.” LALLY ASKS: “Um, had you cleaned off your car at that time?” PROCTOR REPLIES: “No.” ——— Lally then proceeds to ask both Yuri and Proctor about arriving at the Canton Police Department, who was there in the parking lot first, etc. ——— When ADA Lally was about to ask Bukhenik this oddly specific 8:22am whereabouts question, he initially starts out saying “And sir, when you arrived, so at approximately 8:22 in the morning or so…” almost as if he’d remembered he was supposed to get something important in about 8:22am BEFORE asking Yuri or Proctor about when they arrived at the Canton Police Department. We’ve never heard anything whatsoever about either 8:22am OR about Yuri or Proctor allegedly at home shoveling/snow blowing/removing. Additionally, having looked back at all of the known timestamp data and timeline pertaining to this case, there wasn’t anything I could find that happened at 8:22am on January 29, 2022. 8:22am is an oddly specific time. If ADA Lally simply wanted to establish that these guys had not yet shoveled out their driveways at that time, were shoveling their driveways at that time/after being notified around 6:40am but prior to going to the Canton Police Department, wouldn’t he be more broad/vague? “What were you doing around 8 or 8:30am?” for instance? Particularly given this was elicited during direct examination…in other words, asking a witness on direct what they were doing at 8:22am is semi-leading the witness with that specific timestamp. But also, isn’t it odd for these witnesses to know down to the minute that at 8:22am, that was precisely when they started shoveling out their driveways? Or whether they’d began shoveling out their driveways yet at that precise time or not? Wouldn’t the more natural response to that question be something along the lines of “I don’t remember exactly what time I began or finished shoveling, but it was the last thing I did before I left the house to go to CPD, and I know I arrived at CPD around 9am” for example? 8:22am is not a time that, based on prior testimony and evidence, holds any significance. But clearly, now it does. Why is that? Why was it of enough importance for Lally to remember he needed to establish that both of those witnesses were at their homes at that time, and not elsewhere? What’s interesting is that Lally asks Yuri what he was doing at 8:22am, and Yuri responds he was snow blowing then. But for Proctor, Lally asks where he was at 8:22am, to which Proctor simply replies “home”. Lally then follows up to ask Proctor if he’d begun shoveling or clearing off his car then, to which he says “not yet” and “no”. So clearly it was important to establish that both Yuri Bukhenik & Michael Proctor hadn’t shoveled out their driveways yet, hadn’t left their homes yet, and were nowhere else but their homes at 8:22am. Why does this matter? Also, if Yuri and Proctor were notified around 6:40am of a situation they’d have to respond to, why did they wait nearly 2 hours before beginning to shovel their driveways? I’m not saying it was an attempt at an alibi, but certainly it was significant enough for Lally to be sure to establish that at precisely that exact moment in time, Yuri & Proctor weren’t somewhere else. What say you? #KarenReadTrial #KarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe #FreeKarenRead #CantonCoverup #PoliceCorruption

Olivia

195,996 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Can someone, anyone, explain the major discrepancies in Lance Twiggs’s testimony that I’m hearing? 1. Lance testified that Tyler did not text him directly AT ALL on September 10th. He testified that the only message that came through that day was via an automated Discord message from Tyler to a D&D server group chat that they were both a part of at 11 pm. Why then are we shown screenshots of a personal text message thread from September 10th where there are texts from Tyler to Lance starting at 4:33 pm?? There’s also a direct text supposedly from Tyler at 11 pm as well — is that what’s being referred to as the “automated” message (although it’s not remotely from Discord)?? Tyler then supposedly sends a flurry of texts detailing his crime to Lance all before midnight. Why did Lance not account for any of these messages when he said Tyler “did not text him directly” all day?? 2. How would Lance know if the one 11 pm text message was “automated” when iMessage doesn’t differentiate between messages that are scheduled before or sent in the moment? 3. Prosecutor Ryan McBride, in his interview of Lance, while reading the messages exchanged.. said clear as day that the messages spanned from September 10th to September 12th. Lance agrees with this. Seconds later, he changes the story and says the messages were from September 10th to the evening of September 11th. Why? Agent Brian Davis, while on the stand, then testified to the messages ending September 11th, but the attorney who questioned him also sounded majorly confused based on what she was reading. She kept saying: “Does September 12th.. make more sense? Does it make sense?” Why did she initially ALSO say September 12th but then backtrack?? 4. Lance says in his testimony that he picked the note up and then never saw it again. Did he not burn it? How could he not pick it up again if he did that. Why was there no testimony to him burning it?

Brave Report

21,523 просмотров • 4 дней назад

Brian Jr’s testimony regarding the morning of January 29th, 2022, raises several significant contradictions when cross-referenced with photographic evidence, witness statements, and known arrival times is ummm well SUS! . Brian Jr. testified that He was woken up by his father around 7:30–8:00 a.m. He got dressed and went downstairs, where he saw his parents, Aunt Jen, and Uncle Matt He said the birthday card and donuts from Julie were already there He remained downstairs for about 15 minutes, then returned to his room He later came down again and at that point saw only his parents However, this version of events does not align with other verified facts. Auntie Julie did not arrive at the house until approximately 8:00–8:30 a.m. She brought the birthday card and donuts with her. Therefore, if Brian Jr. was truly downstairs around 7:30–8:00 a.m., it would not have been possible for those items to be present. His claim that they were already there is provably false. Lt. Gallagher photographed the driveway between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m., and Brian Jr.’s vehicle was not present. If he was home and downstairs during that time, his car should have been visible. Its absence suggests he was not at the house during that time window, directly contradicting his testimony. Caitlin Albert was reportedly present at 34 Fairview the night of January 28th and was said to be the last to leave, around 1:30 a.m., allegedly picked up by her boyfriend, Tristan. But this narrative raises key questions. No one, including multiple officers, Jen McCabe, or Julie, reported seeing Chloe, at the house that morning. Chloe is never mentioned in any official observations, logs, or footage If Caitlan’s claim about Tristan picking her up is not truthful, then the possibility emerges that she left @ 1:30 with her brother, Brian Jr, using his vehicle to return to Easton. This would Explain why Brian Jr.'s car was missing in Gallagher’s photos and why no one saw Chloe the next morning.Given the ummm inconsistencies and the lack of visual confirmation from key individuals, a plausible alternative timeline can be made. In the early morning hours of Jan. 29th, Brian Jr drove Caitlan and Chloe back to her Easton apartment He then returned before 8:30 a.m, before Auntie Julie arrived. Let’s lay it out, Canton chronicle style. While Allie was cruising town like she was training for Uber Olympics and Higgins was allegedly peeking in cars back at CPD for no known reason (lost his keys? Looking for snacks? who knows), Brian Jr was playing chauffeur. The simplest answer might be the right one! Brian Jr took his sister Caitlan and the dog, Chloe, back to her apartment in Easton.Think about it, Chloe was never seen at the house. No one in law enforcement saw the dog cause you know Gallagher would've documented that in triplicate And on Brian’s second trip downstairs, everyone was gone... but also: still no mention of Julie. So if he really came down the first time at 7:30… where was his car? If he came down the 2nd time he would have seen his auntie Julie, But he says he saw the card and donuts that only arrived with Julie.

Dixie Normus

43,197 просмотров • 1 год назад

With the recent defamation lawsuit filed by members of the McCabe/Albert group, there’s now a lot of focus on what people have said publicly. But to understand why people have been asking questions over the past 3 years… you have to go back to the testimony and the timeline itself. Colin says he was at Mike Leonetti’s house and admits he doesn’t remember how he got there but remembers he was drinking Bud Lights So right off the bat we have memory gaps about how his night even started. He testifies that Allie McCabe picked him up and brought him to Fairview between 10:30–11:00 PM From the actual texts when Colin wanted a ride home at 11:54 Colin texts Allie “U can get me now. If easier”, At 11:55 PM She responds and at 12:10 AM She texts “here” Now from Allie’s testimony, She says she had Avery and Danielle in the car, dropped them off, Then went to another friend’s house, Then came back to pick Colin up. All between 11:54 PM and 12:10 AM. Where exactly was she when she got the text? She says she doesn’t really remember What route did she take to Fairview? She doesn’t remember Where did she park? “I believe the driveway… not entirely sure” How long between “here” and Colin coming out? “A few minutes” Meanwhile, Colin’s Version of That Same Moment He Says after getting the “here” text, he came out in about 30 seconds to a minute,Says he exited through the side door near the garage, Says he saw uncle Brian Albert and Auntie Nicole Albert but Nicole Albert Says she came in the front door and bumped into Colin and that He told her he was leaving because his ride was coming. Meanwhile, Brian Albert Says he came in the side door and that Colin was the kitchen no more than 5 minutes and that he went to the bathroom and when he came out, Colin was gone Allie says She drove him straight home, No stops, About a 5-minute drive, BUT, She can’t recall the route Colin says His parents were already in bed, He went upstairs to say goodnight But We know his father didn’t leave the bar until 12:14 AM The only hard evidence presented for this timeline is A screenshot of text messages Everything else? Testimony, Memory, Recollection When you have a witness who doesn’t remember how the night started, a tight timeline with multiple stops compressed into minutes, conflicting recollections about movements and timing, and limited physical evidence to anchor it all, is it unreasonable for people to ask questions? This isn’t about claiming what happened. It’s about acknowledging what doesn’t clearly make sense yet.

Dixie Normus

30,553 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Elvis Presley looking back on what life was really like during his time in the Army: In a 1960 interview at Graceland, Elvis pushes back against the tabloid narratives that had built up around him during his service in Germany. The interviewer asks about rumors of a special someone he met overseas. Elvis responds: "Not any special one. There was a little girl that I was seeing quite often over there that her father was in the Air Force, and actually they only got over there about 2 months before I left. I was seeing her and she was at the airport when I left and there were some pictures made of her. But it was no big romance. I mean, the stories came out 'the girl he left behind' and all that. It wasn't like that." The frustration with how his life was being portrayed comes through when the interviewer casually asks if he liked the food in Germany and whether he ate out at restaurants. Elvis's answer reveals just how isolated his time abroad actually was: "I never ate in a restaurant the entire time when I was in Germany. I either ate in the mess hall or at home. One of the two. In fact, I never went anywhere while I was in Europe except to Paris. I went to Paris on a leave and that was all." The picture he paints is strikingly different from what fans might have imagined — no European adventures, no restaurant dinners, no grand romance. Just the mess hall, home, and one trip to Paris. When asked about what comes next, Elvis keeps it simple and focused: "Well, the first thing I have to do is to cut some records, and then after that I have the television show with Frank Sinatra."

History Nerd

12,902 просмотров • 23 дней назад

John Leonetti has now donated thousands of dollars to the House Defendants’ legal fund. This is the same John Leonetti who owned the home where, by sworn testimony, a large group of under-21 kids were drinking on the night of January 28, 2022. That’s not speculation. That comes from their own witnesses. Colin Albert testified he was at Leonetti’s house that night and there was a text shared in which he was “chugging beers.” He also testified Allie picked him up from that house and drove him to Fairview. Allie then claims she later picked him up again from Fairview to bring him home. There are no independent facts, records, that corroborate that second pickup. That matters. When people point out this very narrow, very factual issue that an adult homeowner allegedly allowed underage drinking and that this house sits squarely in the timeline what happens? Instead of answers, we get attacks. The loudest voices backing the house defendants, including so-called “true crime” commentators like Julie Carpenter, don’t address the question at all. They attack the person asking it. No clarification. No denial. No explanation. Just outrage. Why is questioning this labeled “obsession,” while donating thousands to defend those witnesses is considered noble? And most importantly, why is scrutiny only acceptable when it points away from certain people but suddenly “disturbing” when it points toward them? If the story is solid, it should withstand questions. If the timelines are true, they should align with evidence. And if underage drinking, pickups, drop-offs, and missing corroboration are irrelevant then someone should be able to say why. So far, no one has. Just attacks.

Dixie Normus

26,969 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад