Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Off-Topic
Reply to "Anybody following the Karen Read trial in Boston?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Who here watched the Body in the Snow documentary? She pretty much convicted herself. They played her own words from that against her in court. - She said she 'anticipated' seeing his body when they pulled up to the Alberts in the morning (why would she even think that in the first place?) - She said she pulled glass out of the side of his nose when she found him - Rather that thinking he maybe passed out somewhere she told his daughter that a snow plow hit him when she woke her up at 4:30 am because that is a totally normal thing to think She was drunk and her memory was hazy but she knew deep down she hit him and she tells on herself. Guilty. And yes, the Alberts and co. acted weird that night (and later) and we probably will never know why. [/quote] [b]If we are going to convict people on how they acted (or didn’t) during a stressful event, then why don’t you also consider that she called him over and over looking for him, and was hysterical at the scene, as recorded by body cam? [/b]Would a guilty person do that?[/quote] Yes. [/quote] See I kinda think that someone refusing to come outside when another cop is dead on their front lawn, and then destroying their phone, rehoming their dog that has been accused of being involved in some way, and moving out of the house that was a potential crime scene, among other suspect behaviors, says a lot more about guilt than a gf calling her bf, asking where he is. [/quote] You're entirely out of touch with the timeline of this case, clearly. Chloe was rehomed many months before she was ever accused in this CONspiracy innocence fraud campaign. Chloe was rehomed because she bit a neighbor during a dog fight which the neighbor attempted to break up. The home was sold many months before the CONspiracy innocence fraud campaign arose - the owners had first spoken to a realtor about selling it months BEFORE John O'Keefe was struck by Karen Read and left to die on their front lawn. The record on that is uncontroverted. Brian Albert didn't destroy his phone, he upgraded it at the phone store and the data all transferred - total red herring. Brian Higgins threw his phone away at the Cape Cod military base where he throws ALL his garbage away because there is no garbage collection at his Cape Cod home and he has access to the base as a federal officer. He got rid of his phone because he was an undercover DEA agent and didn't want to burn his CIs whose contact information was in his phone. Congratulations, you've swallowed the innocence fraud campaign propaganda hook, line and sinker - like the gullible guppy you are. [/quote] How do you know that the dog isn't a time traveler? That's reasonable doubt! /s[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics