Anybody following the Karen Read trial in Boston?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think she’s innocent - hope the jury finds her not guilty.

Who is Karen Read?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she’s innocent - hope the jury finds her not guilty.

Who is Karen Read?

Do you have access to DCUM and not Google?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she’s innocent - hope the jury finds her not guilty.

Who is Karen Read?

Go to Netflix and watch. Come back tomorrow

[Anonymous]

These people seem like total boozebags.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

If we go based on the most relevant history, which is her prior trial, prepare yourself for the disappointment of a hung jury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

If we go based on the most relevant history, which is her prior trial, prepare yourself for the disappointment of a hung jury.

No worries, the Commonwealth tried Cara Rintala four times and finally got that wife murderer put away in prison where she belongs. They'll not give up on putting this cop killer away, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

LOL. Have you seen what happened with Casey Anthony?

Far more reasonable doubt here…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

LOL. Have you seen what happened with Casey Anthony?

Far more reasonable doubt here…

I think she likely hit him with her car, but under a reasonable doubt standard, would not vote guilty. It was a party in a snowstorm, cars coming and going, snow plows, etc so lots of possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

It was incredibly silly but I imagine designed to give a visual to the jury of how it could have happened, even if it's not the way it happened. Psychologically strong even if not scientifically based.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

LOL. Have you seen what happened with Casey Anthony?

Far more reasonable doubt here…

I think she likely hit him with her car, but under a reasonable doubt standard, would not vote guilty. It was a party in a snowstorm, cars coming and going, snow plows, etc so lots of possibilities.

This. I’d also vote NG because there is no way to be sure.

[Anonymous]

Updates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CW's biomedical engineer testifying today and cooking Karen's goose well and good.

You mean the guy who dressed up as the victim (for no apparent reason?) to demonstrate getting paint on his arm and then admitting there’s no real way to know how the accident happened? Yea, no. Wait until Alessi obliterates him on cross. The CW has failed to prove its case at all. Its own witnesses sow reasonable doubt.

You don't understand the legal concept of reasonable doubt nor how it properly applies in criminal cases. There are many people in US prisons rightfully convicted on far less evidence than the Commonwealth has already presented against Karen Read.

Prepare yourself for the apparent disappointment of guilty verdicts.

LOL. Have you seen what happened with Casey Anthony?

Far more reasonable doubt here…

I think she likely hit him with her car, but under a reasonable doubt standard, would not vote guilty. It was a party in a snowstorm, cars coming and going, snow plows, etc so lots of possibilities.

Were the taillight pieces found in the road or on the lawn?

[Anonymous]

It's one of those cases where you know the defendant is guilty, but there's not enough evidence to convict.