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]Does anyone think that maybe with her hair-trigger temper (you can tell by listening to her anger in v.m. messages) mixed with alcohol and the fact he didn't want her anymore... that maybe she revved up the engine, and backed up towards JOK at an alarming speed (no intention to kill him but more to scare him), he threw something at her tail light in fear, lost his balance and a shoe and hit his head? She drove away without knowing he fell and then once alcohol started to wear off and JOK was missing, she started remembering their argument and freaked out that she may have "hit" him. Scratches are strange but I just can't see 12-14 people taking a murder to their graves. [/quote] That would still be murder 2, because she engaged in extremely reckless conduct that disregarded human life - and death occurred. That's depraved heart murder 2 third prong of the MA general law statute. But it doesn't explain how his hair and DNA were on the back end of her SUV adjacent to her broken out tail light, pieces of which were all over the road in front of 34 Fairview Road and tiny pieces of which were embedded in John's torn hoodie. [/quote] Upon second read I am assuming that you are asserting the tail light was broken out by the glass he threw at the vehicle? But that over looks that the largest pieces of the broken cocktail glass were found on the lawn near the location of John's body, and again doesn't account for the tiny pieces of tail light that were embedded in John's hoodie. And again, the intentional act of backing a 6000lb SUV at high speed at a human body, whatever the result intended, meets the elements of third prong murder 2 in the Commonwealth. Whether her vehicle made contact with his body or if it just caused him to stumble and fall and all the injuries were resulting from that (defies logic), she would still be responsible for his death.[/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