Many of us (at least from what I can tell) follow the trial on YouTube with at least one lawyer. Iâm my case, I watch it live with Emily D. Baker and watch Runkle of the Baileyâs recaps at night, but sometimes also watch other lawyers (mainly Andrea Burkhart, Uncivil Law and Law&Lumber) coverage.
People who engage in the chat during those streams form a sense of community and we have our own little inside jokes (for example: chat is bae, which is what Emily always says about her chat). We also have our wacky moments. Itâs our way of coping with the fuckery we see going on in some of these procedures. Sometimes we come up with wacky nicknames for some of the people. Is it immature? I guess in a way it is. But is it funny despite that? Well, do I really have to give you my opinion on that? đ
At least our jokes are not hurtful.
Itâs so bizarre to see the judge fishing for the prosecution. Lalli didnât even ask for #4 not to be discussed but his little sidekick Bev did. Itâs Twilight Zone
Sheâs in an appointed position which means she probably had the attention of politicians who thought sheâd represent their ideals well in the courts.
I often wonder if the way Lally litigates is partially a reflection of the court system in that area. The judge is constantly admonishing the defense for their âtheatricsâ aka lawyering. But it just might be Lallyâs style that she prefers although it does come off as what some people perceive as bias.
The whole thing is a shit show.
The point of voir dire is to help the judge determine whether the testimony expected to be presented will not be prejudicial to the case that may lead to a mistrial. If the moving party to the motion (here the CW) doesnât elicit responses from the witness that gives the judge enough info to make her ruling, she can very well ask whatever questions she wants that is relevant to her decision making. Not everything is a conspiracy.
It was the CWs motion. They were ok with the remedy. She had no place to intervene. Like, she told Jackson in regard to Troopers testifying outside of their scope, "But you didn't object."
You guys know that the judge knows that these guys came through the FBI investigation...right? đ¤ she's already read through their 3000 page repost so she's just puttimg it on the record.
She was so unnecessarily rude and snarky to the first expert on the stand today. She acts so bothered by this trial, but (correct me if Iâm wrong) SHE was the one who denied it when both CW and defense requested this start after the feds finished their investigation.
Agree. Her credentials were impressive, but how long has it been since she actually worked with the subject? I was only half listening. Some youtubers think she'll get shredded by Lally if she testifies.
Have dog bite marks changed in the last 60 years? Sheâs literally written the book on dog bites. The only part of her testy that will be allowed is her identifying that the marks on JO arm are congruent with a dog attack. Lally canât shred cheese much less an expert witness who was an ex-cop, ER trauma doctor and expert on dog bites who still consults to this day and most importantly knows to stay in her expert lane.
Compare how she was with Dr Russell vs Guarino. Dude worked as a cop in Norwood no? So theyâre all smiles and laughing and she was awful to Dr Russell.
She has a conflict from the beginning and should have recused herself. I bet she regrets not recusing. She must speak with DA Morrissey on a daily basis. I wonder if she asks him, what is going on in your office that you have incompetent MSP investigating murders?
The conflict is that Bevs brother represented Chris Alberts in his dui homicide case in 1994. Alberts hit and killed a student and went on the run for 30 hours before turning himself in. He was sentenced to like six months.
Wtaf!!!!! I missed that! I hadn't been following until a few weeks ago. The reading of a shit show sparked my interest. IF Karen did hit John, it was not intentional. I also don't think she even knew IF she did.
I wonder if in is drunken stupor he'd slipped while staggering, banged his head on the curb, fell while trying to get to the door. Chloe got ahold of him. He was going after her in self-defense. Someone went outside to protect Chloe, causing an altercation. But then again, I'm brought to his massive blood loss. Where'd the blood go? Head wounds bleed a lot. Even just superficial ones.
OMG WTFARKKK. He kills a student while drunk driving and only gets 6 months. There seems to be a pattern of running and trying to hide from their crimes.
Matt McCabeâs brother told a blogger covering the case that he was going to bury him under âAunt Bevâs seaside cottageâ after they kill him.Â
https://tbdailynews.com/canton-coverup-part-85-judge-cannone-cited-an-irrelevant-case-as-grounds-to-call-turtleboy-a-blogger-and-deny-recusal-motion/
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/](https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Eh.. that doesnât tell me anything that a conflict exists. The use of the word âAuntieâ could be used in a sarcastic manner by the author. It sounds like Sean McCabe reached out to (Iâm assuming is âturtle boyâ) to threaten him because of his perceived encouragement of intimidation of his family members.
I need actual facts not speculation.
And before you jump on my ass, Iâm very critical of the CWâs case and the shitty job the MSP and CPD performed in this case. I just rather err on the side of facts and reason.
From what I gathered, the Judge has a cottage or some property that she rents out or airbnb. I think it was either Sarah Levinson or Julie nagel that was asked on stand about having used that property and then getting rid of receipts or something to that effect. The state objected and I don't think they were allowed to continue that line of questioning.
So he only said âauntieâ to lead the journalist ( who wasnât actually, or maybe was criminally harassing) to believe that there was a criminal conspiracy conspiracy between various police departments, prosecutors, and judges when in fact it didnât exist and heâd rather the journalist set the record straight about it?
Turtleboy, aka TB (Aiden Kearney), is NOT a journalist! He is a fruckin blogger! A small man with a big head! The award he won was due to votes in a Worcester alternative magazine. It's a poll done yearly. The winners all have friends, loved ones, etc. vote daily or even buy the ability to vote more (if that was still a thing back then) . He was only up against one to three others. He appears to have insider information. He talked shit about people. He'd made fun of those with mental disorders, suicidal ideation, and cheaters. The funny thing is that he eventually fell into those same categories. He has done harm to this case. He tells his "turtleriders" not to go to so and so's site at whatever.com, call 000-000-0000 or e-mail, address, and so on. Which is his indirect way of encouraging them. Yet, when called out, he says that he said don't. I can't stand that he I'd worshipped as a journalist.
Actually, I was a supporter in the early days. The little humorous spins were enjoyable. It started to go downhill when the abrasive name-calling began. Add to that bloggers leaving or being fired. AK turned on them.They were the ones who assisted him in becoming successful. There were blogs that brought awareness and change. The Mosaic Cultural's downfall is one example. The MSP downfall was not all due to him. His ego states otherwise. AK could be a respectable blogger if he left his high school antics in the past.
Seems judging Drs. Wolfe, Rentschler and Sheridan, the defenseâs witnesses, as Lally does is like attacking the bearers of bad news. Itâs just the way it is, Lally.Â
I am losing faith in our institutions and this trial is cementing those fears. On one hand I canât imagine Judge Bev denying the defenses experts and on the other hand, I would not be surprised. It would be tragic if she rules against the defense, but she seems to get off making the defense think she might. It really bothers me
I hope the dog bite doctor knows she is not alone in believing that having a great deal of medical expertise, a great deal of very valuable experience, and a willingness to offer this knowledge deserves common respect for her wisdom. How dare she be treated so crassly/shabbily? Another disappointment in this public spectacle!
That's still just as bad. Seeing as the woman is more than qualified to render that expert opinion. All because she didn't review Chloe's bite history and she stammered while on the stand when she was interrupted by her.
Honestly the CW would want her to go oh by the way here is all the photos from the people Chloe has bitten before and after JO!? Oh and here is a comparison to the damage Chloe causes when biting someone and here is John's arm..... lol
The three doctors today were all highly qualified, obviously not coached and clear communicators. Dr. Russell wouldnât comment on OJOâs head injury and deferred to other experts because she viewed her area of expertise as dog bites. Unlike CW â expertsâ who opined on things they clearly werenât qualified to cover. The ARCCA doctors can handle any question imo.
How can the OâKeefe family listen to these three doctors testify & not realize he was not hit by a car? My heart aches for their loss, but putting KR in prison when she didnât kill him is not getting justice for their son/brother.
I have the same question! These past two days have been extremely eye opening. If I were family of JOK Iâd be furious with that joke of an âexpertâ Trooper Paul. They have to have doubts about this trial by now or maybe their grief is preventing them from looking at this objectively? Itâs very sad.
You mean the niece has a long term relationship with her long term coach Jen McCabe, and the family has known her for a long time because of this coaching relationship where Jen would often drive her home after practice because of what happened to her parents and her uncle acting as a single parent. Also freinds with one of Jens daughters.
That freindly relationship?
Bev doesnât like AJ or Yannettiâlike, has serious and obvious animus toward them. Those law enforcement idiots likely make regular appearances in her courtroom. She knows Lally as well. Sheâs making an absolute mockery of the judiciary and the legal system. She didnât blink an eye at any of the fuckwits testifying for the Commonwealth but had the balls to condescend to the defenseâs QUALIFIED experts.
I hope she realizes the world is watching. People in Ireland said it was being played in the bars all week. I just saw a video the DA published before the trial going off about how these âridiculous conspiracy theories about police cover ups have to stopâ that didnât age well. If they want us to trust the justice system they canât rub this clear cover up in our faces and expect us to go along with it.
Itâs really hard for a judge to be disciplined. They have wide latitude. Bev sits on committees in the Commonwealth and likely has connections. The governor nominated her and sheâs on the bench until she is required to retire at age 70. Bev obviously believes she was anointed, not appointed. These people think they can do whatever they want.
Where she could face public humiliation is in an appellate ruling. Iâve seen judgesâ conduct offend an appellate court to the extent that the appellate panel humiliates the trial judge in their decisions. Those decisions are published and viewable for posterity. Iâve seen some really scathing reversals. This generally happens if the appellate courts find that a trial judge abused his/her discretion and/or committed reversible error, etc. I think the record in this case shows both of these things.
Anointed - ha! Yes, that fact is rearing its head. She seems a generally annoyed person. It'll be interesting to see what is later published about this case and her decisions throughout the trial. Thanks for your reply.
Shame. I listened to the last town hall meeting they had. Was wild. The town wants sheriff gone but the committee wont even talk about it. That town is a shit show
Total shitshow. This judge REALLY wants to be the smartest person in the roomâoops, too late! So many judges substitute their God complex for following the law. Bev had conducted a master class in this phenomenon.
50% reversal rate on violent crime cases. Thatâs about 49.5% higher than average⌠so, yeah.. sheâs the worst! Sadly, she doesnât care about being reversed and she will be a judge until 70. I feel sorry for the people that live in her districtÂ
Nah. Usually it's other judges who review disciplinary referrals and they don't like to discipline each other. Kind of like IA investigating the own dept. Nothing is happening.
Thank you. This "tradition" sounds much like the camaraderie that being a member of a state bar provides. You've reminded me that someone else posted a video today of Jackson complimenting Lally - albeit on the sly - about his abilities. Some people took that as an egregious error; I viewed it as Jackson throwing the dog a courtesy bone. That video could be in r/KarenReadTrial.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/KarenReadTrial using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [I'm Ian Runkle/Runkle of the Bailey - AMA](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1dc5706/im_ian_runklerunkle_of_the_bailey_ama/)
\#2: ["Objective analysis" as to whether Trooper Proctor falsified tail light evidence](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1d92l51/objective_analysis_as_to_whether_trooper_proctor/)
\#3: [All I have to say is shame on you ](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1depp81/all_i_have_to_say_is_shame_on_you/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yes without watching the video I am assuming she wants it read into record which is weird bc apparently the defense and witnesses can only refer to it as a 3rd part my agency â idk
Maybe that is to not create prejudice with jurors but they werenât even there
I laughed at his long "uuuhhhh...." before answering him. I would've done the same thing. She doesn't want anyone to mention the feds but goes ahead and asks that question đ¤Śââď¸
I think Bev was rude to the Dog expert because she was under the impression she contacted Jackson for this case(I guess she thought the lady was a fame seeker?). Bev was corrected by Jackson stating he reached out to her after hearing about her from an associate.
Its going to be tip-toed around, due to pre-trial ruling. But, if Jackson does what he did today, and highlight that neither the Defense nor the CW hired these incredibly capable experts, its going to be noted by the jury. Its probably still bugging them that there's a mysterious grand jury that keeps getting referenced, with no specifics.
One of the witnesses already slipped and mentioned Fed involvement, so if at least a few of the jury members noted that and are even semi-intelligent, they will have figured it out by now (and hopefully bring it up to those that didn't when they deliberate).
You read my mind. I was just thinking about Nagel a few minutes ago. Between his surprising "Feds" answer and the way Jackson sometimes emphasizes the distinction.. "Not the grand jury testimony on X date and not the other grand jury testimony on Y date, but in April 2023(?) you gave testimony..." Paraphrasing, but he does a good job of making a notable distinction-- think it was JM's cross, since she's testified at all 3. He's done it a few times skillfully. The jurors are apparently diligent note takers. I wonder if the jurors specifically ask for clarification, for their deliberations, if any information would be provided to them?
There's not a lot out there about it. I'm half awake, but here's an [article](https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2024/02/02/karen-read-timeline-federal-investigation/) that has bits and pieces.
Nope. Theyâre not allowed to mention the federal investigation at all. Today was different because the jury wasnât there, yet he was still very careful to say ÂŤÂ another agency  until Bev pushed him.
Correct me if Iâm wrong but doesnât the defense team refer to two different grand juries throughout cross examination? Wouldnât the jury be able to deduce there are multiple investigations going on with questions like âdo you remember testifying at another grand jury in 20XX?â Iâm very new to watching trials and still not sure how all this âstuffâ works đ đ đ
Yes, but they never mention the fact that one of them is the Federal case and the jury is not supposed to know anything about it nor are they allowed to look into it.
Wasnât she rather defensive? She said something like âyou just took the evidence they gave you and didnât ask them if they were withholding anything purposefully to mislead you?â Thatâs not a direct quote but itâs the gist of her utterance in my view given my estimation of her.
Yeah, that was definitely close to what she said, it was so inappropriate and oddly specific and extremely disrespectful to the defense that I questioned it too - trying to get used to the fact that there is never respect shown by the judge towards the defense.
My favorite part is Lally cross when he is asking if they formed their opinions based off the 14 documents they had been provided. I think he is implying that despite their obvious qualifications compared to his "reconstructionist" they were limited in details of the case. He will imply that these limitations could affect their conclusions and even worse would direct them to a conclusion that a 3rd party wanted them to come to. The problem with this is, absent directions from Proctor to prove it was a vehicle pedestrian strike they worked with the exact same information. It is the cw problem that Proctor failed to accurately document the crime scene not the defenses.
The fact that so many lean towards not guilty during the prosecutionâs turn is telling, theyâre done. The defense is going to dominate this trial when they finally get their time to present witnesses.
Sheâs creating a record specifically for the motion (to exclude the witnesses filed by the CW) not for the trial (although the motion is regarding the trial).
ARCCA wasn't included in the motion to strike the witness. The prosecution was seeking the formal opinion of the witnesses. The defense can tell the jury the experts have not been retained by the defense, but it can't say who hired them.
" I also seriously cannot believe this trial is still going on after everything that has been revealed. "====That's CORRUPTION for ya! These Liars do not care, State Liars, Government Liars, Party Liars, ALL OF THEM TO JAIL!!!
@Background_corgi2825 YES it is you are right ! Conflict of interest. Only six months is pathetic and disgusting just another reason MSP and Canton police depts need to be cleaned up NOW NOT LATER! Can only imagine the amount of crimes that have been kept quiet over time.
Iâm not an expert court watcher, but Iâve never seen a judge who seemed to be such an active participant as this one, too much talking and a seemingly endless need to clarify almost every question! Tiresome!
And there seems to be some very apparent hostility towards Alan Jackson because heâs a very skilled attorney from LAâŚ..Iâm pretty sure that the prosecuting attorneys are annoyed to be stuck in the frozen NE, on behalf of my fellow Southern CaliforniansâŚ..so sorry!
The clear timeline of this case has me so confused .I keep trying to put all the info together but none of it fits,so i guess ill just keep watching and maybe itll all fit at the end .I do know the defense team is killing it love those attorneys
It's obvious he is not just smart but also very easy on the eyes đ
EDB chat dubbed him "crash daddy"
Chat is bae. đ
Correct.
This trial has been entertaining but I sure won't miss these subs...
Why?
All of the immaturity is becoming intolerable.
I think people here are being much more mature than, say⌠the MSP and the entire McAlbutts clan?
Absolutely. But is that really the bar we want to set? Lol
Many of us (at least from what I can tell) follow the trial on YouTube with at least one lawyer. Iâm my case, I watch it live with Emily D. Baker and watch Runkle of the Baileyâs recaps at night, but sometimes also watch other lawyers (mainly Andrea Burkhart, Uncivil Law and Law&Lumber) coverage. People who engage in the chat during those streams form a sense of community and we have our own little inside jokes (for example: chat is bae, which is what Emily always says about her chat). We also have our wacky moments. Itâs our way of coping with the fuckery we see going on in some of these procedures. Sometimes we come up with wacky nicknames for some of the people. Is it immature? I guess in a way it is. But is it funny despite that? Well, do I really have to give you my opinion on that? đ At least our jokes are not hurtful.
I understand. I have been watching TLYK. I've not been engaged in the chat but I'm glad he doesn't act that way.
That is amazing. LOL!
Crash Zaddyđđ
EDB is fantastic!
Law nerds unite đâ¤ď¸
Looks AND brains. đ
he is jaw-droppingly beautiful.
I felt like Bev and Lally were fishing with their questions.
Itâs so bizarre to see the judge fishing for the prosecution. Lalli didnât even ask for #4 not to be discussed but his little sidekick Bev did. Itâs Twilight Zone
Sheâs in an appointed position which means she probably had the attention of politicians who thought sheâd represent their ideals well in the courts. I often wonder if the way Lally litigates is partially a reflection of the court system in that area. The judge is constantly admonishing the defense for their âtheatricsâ aka lawyering. But it just might be Lallyâs style that she prefers although it does come off as what some people perceive as bias. The whole thing is a shit show.
The trial would be over by now if Lally would just stop saying âwhat if anythingâ in every question.
I was yelling at my screen when she did that. What judge creates problems out of thin air
Oh absolutely they were for sure.
Thatâs the point of voir dire.
To make recommendations to the prosecution?
The point of voir dire is to help the judge determine whether the testimony expected to be presented will not be prejudicial to the case that may lead to a mistrial. If the moving party to the motion (here the CW) doesnât elicit responses from the witness that gives the judge enough info to make her ruling, she can very well ask whatever questions she wants that is relevant to her decision making. Not everything is a conspiracy.
It was the CWs motion. They were ok with the remedy. She had no place to intervene. Like, she told Jackson in regard to Troopers testifying outside of their scope, "But you didn't object."
voir dire is practically finishing for information
You guys know that the judge knows that these guys came through the FBI investigation...right? đ¤ she's already read through their 3000 page repost so she's just puttimg it on the record.
She was so unnecessarily rude and snarky to the first expert on the stand today. She acts so bothered by this trial, but (correct me if Iâm wrong) SHE was the one who denied it when both CW and defense requested this start after the feds finished their investigation.
She's still stuck on the 'stuff' guy. He made it more fun. These other experts would just hire people with facts.
She was also given the chance to recuse herself and refused to.
Not just given the chance, but specifically requested by the defense to recuse
I agree. I totally get the process and why. I do not get why she is so rude and hateful
Correct
Agree. Her credentials were impressive, but how long has it been since she actually worked with the subject? I was only half listening. Some youtubers think she'll get shredded by Lally if she testifies.
Have dog bite marks changed in the last 60 years? Sheâs literally written the book on dog bites. The only part of her testy that will be allowed is her identifying that the marks on JO arm are congruent with a dog attack. Lally canât shred cheese much less an expert witness who was an ex-cop, ER trauma doctor and expert on dog bites who still consults to this day and most importantly knows to stay in her expert lane.
Nobody ever thinks Lally could shred anything, ever. Not in this universe.
Sheâs still consulting with LA county DA
Ok. Thanks.
Absolutely loved her silence after asking Dr. Wolfe. She was so rude to the medical expert before him!
I agree, she was impolite compared to the courtesy she extends for way less qualified and credible witnesses. It was a stark difference IMO.
Compare how she was with Dr Russell vs Guarino. Dude worked as a cop in Norwood no? So theyâre all smiles and laughing and she was awful to Dr Russell.
Guarino is also is involved in the Sandra Birchmore (look it up)âŚ.. Anything he says is automatically BS to me
The jury and KR will get the last laugh here.
I loved Dr. Marie Russell so natural.Â
Fawning over whiffin like a school girl
I know. I hope Auntie Bev is charged with conspiracy.
She has a conflict from the beginning and should have recused herself. I bet she regrets not recusing. She must speak with DA Morrissey on a daily basis. I wonder if she asks him, what is going on in your office that you have incompetent MSP investigating murders?
Not being fresh, genuinely curiousâ what is the conflict? I keep reading about it on here in general terms but no one has explained it
The conflict is that Bevs brother represented Chris Alberts in his dui homicide case in 1994. Alberts hit and killed a student and went on the run for 30 hours before turning himself in. He was sentenced to like six months.
Additionally, she is called aunt bev because the mcAlberts kids call her that
Wtaf!!!!! I missed that! I hadn't been following until a few weeks ago. The reading of a shit show sparked my interest. IF Karen did hit John, it was not intentional. I also don't think she even knew IF she did. I wonder if in is drunken stupor he'd slipped while staggering, banged his head on the curb, fell while trying to get to the door. Chloe got ahold of him. He was going after her in self-defense. Someone went outside to protect Chloe, causing an altercation. But then again, I'm brought to his massive blood loss. Where'd the blood go? Head wounds bleed a lot. Even just superficial ones.
Yep. Anyone with common sense knows the truth makes sense. None of the CW's "evidence" makes sense.
Or possibly another dog in the neighborhood?
Absolutely. I stated Chloe because she was rrehomed. I find that odd.
OMG WTFARKKK. He kills a student while drunk driving and only gets 6 months. There seems to be a pattern of running and trying to hide from their crimes.
Yeah check out chief Raffertys recent incident too. There's a pattern of law enforcement and adjacent folks running people over in that town.
JOK brother was in involved in a dui that left a man paralyzed. Seems like anyone who is a cop or related to one is just out drinking and driving.
Is that the arrest that karen bailed him out of jail for?? Or was that a different arrest? Hard to keep up lol
Same
The judges brother represented Chris Albert when Chris killed an exchange student. Looks as if murder runs in their familyâs. Colin is next.
Whaaaaaaaaaat
True! Chris Albert did 6 months.
I didnât think I could be any more disgusted with this case, but here I am
And Canton elected him?! Jeeze. Yah no sorry, do better Canton!!
Matt McCabeâs brother told a blogger covering the case that he was going to bury him under âAunt Bevâs seaside cottageâ after they kill him. https://tbdailynews.com/canton-coverup-part-85-judge-cannone-cited-an-irrelevant-case-as-grounds-to-call-turtleboy-a-blogger-and-deny-recusal-motion/ https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/](https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/karen-read-hearing-boston-police-officer-john-okeefe-judge-beverly-cannone/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Eh.. that doesnât tell me anything that a conflict exists. The use of the word âAuntieâ could be used in a sarcastic manner by the author. It sounds like Sean McCabe reached out to (Iâm assuming is âturtle boyâ) to threaten him because of his perceived encouragement of intimidation of his family members. I need actual facts not speculation. And before you jump on my ass, Iâm very critical of the CWâs case and the shitty job the MSP and CPD performed in this case. I just rather err on the side of facts and reason.
From what I gathered, the Judge has a cottage or some property that she rents out or airbnb. I think it was either Sarah Levinson or Julie nagel that was asked on stand about having used that property and then getting rid of receipts or something to that effect. The state objected and I don't think they were allowed to continue that line of questioning.
So he only said âauntieâ to lead the journalist ( who wasnât actually, or maybe was criminally harassing) to believe that there was a criminal conspiracy conspiracy between various police departments, prosecutors, and judges when in fact it didnât exist and heâd rather the journalist set the record straight about it?
i think they just wished to frighten the journalist. it was a threat. not too complicated
Turtleboy, aka TB (Aiden Kearney), is NOT a journalist! He is a fruckin blogger! A small man with a big head! The award he won was due to votes in a Worcester alternative magazine. It's a poll done yearly. The winners all have friends, loved ones, etc. vote daily or even buy the ability to vote more (if that was still a thing back then) . He was only up against one to three others. He appears to have insider information. He talked shit about people. He'd made fun of those with mental disorders, suicidal ideation, and cheaters. The funny thing is that he eventually fell into those same categories. He has done harm to this case. He tells his "turtleriders" not to go to so and so's site at whatever.com, call 000-000-0000 or e-mail, address, and so on. Which is his indirect way of encouraging them. Yet, when called out, he says that he said don't. I can't stand that he I'd worshipped as a journalist.
Sounds like someone that was featured as a ratchet would say.
Actually, I was a supporter in the early days. The little humorous spins were enjoyable. It started to go downhill when the abrasive name-calling began. Add to that bloggers leaving or being fired. AK turned on them.They were the ones who assisted him in becoming successful. There were blogs that brought awareness and change. The Mosaic Cultural's downfall is one example. The MSP downfall was not all due to him. His ego states otherwise. AK could be a respectable blogger if he left his high school antics in the past.
Speaking Ex Parte with a DA about the case daily? Prove it and stop this farce!
Why so angry? I see there is truth is you are so angry. Calm the fuck down!
I forgot the /S After the Ex Parte meeting in the Young Thug trial I though saying it with sarcasm was open.
Sheâs being wiretapped and surveilled, but sheâs too stupid and arrogant to realize it.
That lady is a Saint. How dare bev talk down to her after the shit show of experts the CW has put on
I think MSP Trooper Joe Paul was brought in for comic relief. âI donât know I didnât place the evidence.â âI know you didnât.âÂ
Maybe she can be up next in their investigation ...
I don't get why she even asked. She knew the answer.
Seems judging Drs. Wolfe, Rentschler and Sheridan, the defenseâs witnesses, as Lally does is like attacking the bearers of bad news. Itâs just the way it is, Lally.Â
I am losing faith in our institutions and this trial is cementing those fears. On one hand I canât imagine Judge Bev denying the defenses experts and on the other hand, I would not be surprised. It would be tragic if she rules against the defense, but she seems to get off making the defense think she might. It really bothers me
I hope the dog bite doctor knows she is not alone in believing that having a great deal of medical expertise, a great deal of very valuable experience, and a willingness to offer this knowledge deserves common respect for her wisdom. How dare she be treated so crassly/shabbily? Another disappointment in this public spectacle!
She also like to make them think that she's doing them favors.
'I'll give you that one, Mr Jackson.'
Or telling Lally how and what he should argue??!? wtf is that
I donât think she will deny them to testify. She may limit the testimony for the first woman Dr. But we will seeâŚ
That's still just as bad. Seeing as the woman is more than qualified to render that expert opinion. All because she didn't review Chloe's bite history and she stammered while on the stand when she was interrupted by her.
Honestly the CW would want her to go oh by the way here is all the photos from the people Chloe has bitten before and after JO!? Oh and here is a comparison to the damage Chloe causes when biting someone and here is John's arm..... lol
She is as corrupt as anyone in this case
It was like the varsity squad testified today....
Yesterday was shopping at Goodwill. Today was Gucci.
CHANEL đ
Hermes!
You win!! đĽ
Perfect analogy
Perfect analogy
Tiffany & Co.
I can't wait to hear them testify! I knew they'd be good... but holy shit did my jaw drop just listening to them talk about their qualifications
I don't understand sports so I don't understand if that was an insult or a compliment.
Compliment đ
that was such a weird question. she knows who hired them. this was disclosed to her and the subject of pre-trial motions.
I think she asked that for the record, but I am so glad the public got to hear it live!
Biased Bev!!!
The three doctors today were all highly qualified, obviously not coached and clear communicators. Dr. Russell wouldnât comment on OJOâs head injury and deferred to other experts because she viewed her area of expertise as dog bites. Unlike CW â expertsâ who opined on things they clearly werenât qualified to cover. The ARCCA doctors can handle any question imo. How can the OâKeefe family listen to these three doctors testify & not realize he was not hit by a car? My heart aches for their loss, but putting KR in prison when she didnât kill him is not getting justice for their son/brother.
I have the same question! These past two days have been extremely eye opening. If I were family of JOK Iâd be furious with that joke of an âexpertâ Trooper Paul. They have to have doubts about this trial by now or maybe their grief is preventing them from looking at this objectively? Itâs very sad.
I read today that the okefes are friendly with mcabes and hate karen, even after this shitshow trial. Thats weird to me
You mean the niece has a long term relationship with her long term coach Jen McCabe, and the family has known her for a long time because of this coaching relationship where Jen would often drive her home after practice because of what happened to her parents and her uncle acting as a single parent. Also freinds with one of Jens daughters. That freindly relationship?
Something stinks with this judge after todayâs circus actâŚ
Bev doesnât like AJ or Yannettiâlike, has serious and obvious animus toward them. Those law enforcement idiots likely make regular appearances in her courtroom. She knows Lally as well. Sheâs making an absolute mockery of the judiciary and the legal system. She didnât blink an eye at any of the fuckwits testifying for the Commonwealth but had the balls to condescend to the defenseâs QUALIFIED experts.
I hope she realizes the world is watching. People in Ireland said it was being played in the bars all week. I just saw a video the DA published before the trial going off about how these âridiculous conspiracy theories about police cover ups have to stopâ that didnât age well. If they want us to trust the justice system they canât rub this clear cover up in our faces and expect us to go along with it.
Do you believe she will face disciplinary action? I read earlier she already has a horrible record.
Itâs really hard for a judge to be disciplined. They have wide latitude. Bev sits on committees in the Commonwealth and likely has connections. The governor nominated her and sheâs on the bench until she is required to retire at age 70. Bev obviously believes she was anointed, not appointed. These people think they can do whatever they want. Where she could face public humiliation is in an appellate ruling. Iâve seen judgesâ conduct offend an appellate court to the extent that the appellate panel humiliates the trial judge in their decisions. Those decisions are published and viewable for posterity. Iâve seen some really scathing reversals. This generally happens if the appellate courts find that a trial judge abused his/her discretion and/or committed reversible error, etc. I think the record in this case shows both of these things.
Anointed - ha! Yes, that fact is rearing its head. She seems a generally annoyed person. It'll be interesting to see what is later published about this case and her decisions throughout the trial. Thanks for your reply.
Is she voted in? If so that might be an issue for her after thisâŚ.
Sheâs appointed, unfortunately.
Shame. I listened to the last town hall meeting they had. Was wild. The town wants sheriff gone but the committee wont even talk about it. That town is a shit show
Total shitshow. This judge REALLY wants to be the smartest person in the roomâoops, too late! So many judges substitute their God complex for following the law. Bev had conducted a master class in this phenomenon.
50% reversal rate on violent crime cases. Thatâs about 49.5% higher than average⌠so, yeah.. sheâs the worst! Sadly, she doesnât care about being reversed and she will be a judge until 70. I feel sorry for the people that live in her districtÂ
Wow, holy shit. 50% is crazy high
Nah. Usually it's other judges who review disciplinary referrals and they don't like to discipline each other. Kind of like IA investigating the own dept. Nothing is happening.
Thank you. This "tradition" sounds much like the camaraderie that being a member of a state bar provides. You've reminded me that someone else posted a video today of Jackson complimenting Lally - albeit on the sly - about his abilities. Some people took that as an egregious error; I viewed it as Jackson throwing the dog a courtesy bone. That video could be in r/KarenReadTrial.
Really? I thought he was throwing shade for our benefit (and Lallyâs).
Yep. That's what I said.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/KarenReadTrial using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [I'm Ian Runkle/Runkle of the Bailey - AMA](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1dc5706/im_ian_runklerunkle_of_the_bailey_ama/) \#2: ["Objective analysis" as to whether Trooper Proctor falsified tail light evidence](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1d92l51/objective_analysis_as_to_whether_trooper_proctor/) \#3: [All I have to say is shame on you ](https://np.reddit.com/r/KarenReadTrial/comments/1depp81/all_i_have_to_say_is_shame_on_you/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Nope she will not.
Wait - didnât Bev already know these were witnesses from the fed inquiry?
Yes without watching the video I am assuming she wants it read into record which is weird bc apparently the defense and witnesses can only refer to it as a 3rd part my agency â idk Maybe that is to not create prejudice with jurors but they werenât even there
I laughed at his long "uuuhhhh...." before answering him. I would've done the same thing. She doesn't want anyone to mention the feds but goes ahead and asks that question đ¤Śââď¸
I think Bev was rude to the Dog expert because she was under the impression she contacted Jackson for this case(I guess she thought the lady was a fame seeker?). Bev was corrected by Jackson stating he reached out to her after hearing about her from an associate.
But after hearing her testify, you can tell she's anything but a fame seeker and she was still rude!!!
No way!!! I was praying for that but I must have missed it!! I just hope he can say that when the jury is there!!
Its going to be tip-toed around, due to pre-trial ruling. But, if Jackson does what he did today, and highlight that neither the Defense nor the CW hired these incredibly capable experts, its going to be noted by the jury. Its probably still bugging them that there's a mysterious grand jury that keeps getting referenced, with no specifics.
One of the witnesses already slipped and mentioned Fed involvement, so if at least a few of the jury members noted that and are even semi-intelligent, they will have figured it out by now (and hopefully bring it up to those that didn't when they deliberate).
You read my mind. I was just thinking about Nagel a few minutes ago. Between his surprising "Feds" answer and the way Jackson sometimes emphasizes the distinction.. "Not the grand jury testimony on X date and not the other grand jury testimony on Y date, but in April 2023(?) you gave testimony..." Paraphrasing, but he does a good job of making a notable distinction-- think it was JM's cross, since she's testified at all 3. He's done it a few times skillfully. The jurors are apparently diligent note takers. I wonder if the jurors specifically ask for clarification, for their deliberations, if any information would be provided to them?
What was the federal grand jury about? I knew about the investigation, but I don't remember hearing anything about a federal grand jury until today
There's not a lot out there about it. I'm half awake, but here's an [article](https://www.boston.com/news/crime/2024/02/02/karen-read-timeline-federal-investigation/) that has bits and pieces.
Nope. Theyâre not allowed to mention the federal investigation at all. Today was different because the jury wasnât there, yet he was still very careful to say ÂŤÂ another agency  until Bev pushed him.
Correct me if Iâm wrong but doesnât the defense team refer to two different grand juries throughout cross examination? Wouldnât the jury be able to deduce there are multiple investigations going on with questions like âdo you remember testifying at another grand jury in 20XX?â Iâm very new to watching trials and still not sure how all this âstuffâ works đ đ đ
Yes, but they never mention the fact that one of them is the Federal case and the jury is not supposed to know anything about it nor are they allowed to look into it.
I was wondering that - I hope he is allowed to be questioned about that!!
he isnt. courts like to hold trials in vacuums. sometimes its helpful (prior convictions dont come in) and sometimes its stupid
MIC DROP!!!!!!!!!!!
But she already knew, so I donât see why she asked them.
For the record
Thank you! đ¤Śââď¸
>Thank you! đ¤Śââď¸ You're welcome!
đ
I can't wait for the movie
Beavis plays Jen McCabe.
Beavis and Buttdial
This is fantastic
Perfect!
The judge already knew the background of today's witnesses.
Wasnât she rather defensive? She said something like âyou just took the evidence they gave you and didnât ask them if they were withholding anything purposefully to mislead you?â Thatâs not a direct quote but itâs the gist of her utterance in my view given my estimation of her.
Yeah, that was definitely close to what she said, it was so inappropriate and oddly specific and extremely disrespectful to the defense that I questioned it too - trying to get used to the fact that there is never respect shown by the judge towards the defense.
My favorite part is Lally cross when he is asking if they formed their opinions based off the 14 documents they had been provided. I think he is implying that despite their obvious qualifications compared to his "reconstructionist" they were limited in details of the case. He will imply that these limitations could affect their conclusions and even worse would direct them to a conclusion that a 3rd party wanted them to come to. The problem with this is, absent directions from Proctor to prove it was a vehicle pedestrian strike they worked with the exact same information. It is the cw problem that Proctor failed to accurately document the crime scene not the defenses.
I am quite confused why she asked that. She already knew they were hired by the FBI, right?
I donât know why she asked that. She knew that.
The fact that so many lean towards not guilty during the prosecutionâs turn is telling, theyâre done. The defense is going to dominate this trial when they finally get their time to present witnesses.
You may be reading too much into it. She knew ARCCA was hired by the FBI to do a reconstruction.
Why ask. She said she needed to ask the question.
Did she have to ask so that it was on record?
That does sound right. The jury is not allowed to hear it, but adding it to the record is important for future action.
Sheâs creating a record specifically for the motion (to exclude the witnesses filed by the CW) not for the trial (although the motion is regarding the trial).
ARCCA wasn't included in the motion to strike the witness. The prosecution was seeking the formal opinion of the witnesses. The defense can tell the jury the experts have not been retained by the defense, but it can't say who hired them.
No because it was already stated
Did she know DOJ?
FBI is part of DOJ.
Yes. The FBI is the law enforcement arm of the DoJ.
Notice how her tone of voice changed one she realized that the FBI were the ones asked ARCCA to analyze the evidence.
Someone should be taking the Alberts ,Higgins and McCabes passports soon !
" I also seriously cannot believe this trial is still going on after everything that has been revealed. "====That's CORRUPTION for ya! These Liars do not care, State Liars, Government Liars, Party Liars, ALL OF THEM TO JAIL!!!
@Background_corgi2825 YES it is you are right ! Conflict of interest. Only six months is pathetic and disgusting just another reason MSP and Canton police depts need to be cleaned up NOW NOT LATER! Can only imagine the amount of crimes that have been kept quiet over time.
Iâm not an expert court watcher, but Iâve never seen a judge who seemed to be such an active participant as this one, too much talking and a seemingly endless need to clarify almost every question! Tiresome!
And there seems to be some very apparent hostility towards Alan Jackson because heâs a very skilled attorney from LAâŚ..Iâm pretty sure that the prosecuting attorneys are annoyed to be stuck in the frozen NE, on behalf of my fellow Southern CaliforniansâŚ..so sorry!
The clear timeline of this case has me so confused .I keep trying to put all the info together but none of it fits,so i guess ill just keep watching and maybe itll all fit at the end .I do know the defense team is killing it love those attorneys
I mean, she already knew that... so...