Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wasn’t the house ever part of the investigation????? If someone was found dead on my front yard, I assume the police would like to rule out that it happened in my house.

Actually, no. If there is not probable cause there will not be a warrant issued to search your house. Especially in this case as JOK was found in the snow with taillights around him and one of the women claiming she hit him.

You keep repeating this nonsense. Did anyone actually TRY to get a warrant??

Please speak to any attorney that is willing to discuss this with you. Or better yet reread the constitution and reflect on our basic rights to not be subject to government searches without probable cause. There was zero basis to get a warrant to search the house.

I’m an attorney. You’re clearly a POS who doesn’t care about people’s rights. You’re a thug

???? Isn’t caring about rights being scrupulous about not overreaching with warrants??Caselaw to support a warrant in this situation???

News flash. They could have gotten a warrant. There was cause.

News flash. Defendants have rights too. Not just cops.

Stop cosplaying someone who knows or cares about rights. You just wanted to see her burn because you think cops should be entitled to do whatever they want.

Like drunk driving around and acting like morons and thugs

You must be a terrible attorney if you think there was probable cause to seek a warrant for that house - there most definitely absolutely WAS NOT, and that is a fact pretty much universally acknowledged by every Commonwealth attorney who has commented on the case.

That said, law enforcement was welcomed into the home by the homeowners minutes after John's body was 'found' (Karen knew exactly where he was, because she hit him and left him there) and LEOs were in the house repeatedly that day. There was zero evidence that anything untoward happened in that house, this is just another red herring of the innocence fraud campaign.

Again, you're a terrible lawyer. I sincerely hope you are not practicing criminal law.

You must not be an attorney at all if you think they couldn’t have found PC to search the house. They likely didnt because they were cops and everyone knows it.

In this case:
• O’Keefe’s last known location was the house.
• He was found mortally injured outside it.
• There were people inside who admitted he had planned to visit.
• There were inconsistencies and delays in some witness statements.

= PC

Unfortunately they had tunnel vision and focused on karen without actually INVESTIGATING.

You want to be mad, be mad at the CW.

What "things to be seized" do you feel the police should have listed in an application for a search warrant? That is, what things should they have looked for inside that house?

It’s not my job to determine the parameters of a search warrant. Perhaps the investigator should have figured that out instead of texting his friends about her boobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the verdict in CW v Read is shameful - I despair for the future of our justice system if crowdsourced innocence fraud campaigns are going to rule the day.

Ah well, I guess it will only be the wealthy whites who get a pass on killing cops and other people, no worries.

I knew nothing about this case until this year. The CW did not prove their case, period.

Yes they did. Alec Murdaugh was convicted on the same sort of evidence.

The issue was the noise and distractions caused by the behavior of the Alberts et. al, and Proctor.

Alec Murdaugh was convicted on audiotape of him present at the crime scene at a time when he had claimed to be elsewhere and seconds before the shooting. He produced no alternative explanation--not just no credible explanation but no explanation whatsoever--of why he was there, why he had lied about being there, or who else could have shot his wife and son.

One of these things is not like the other.

Anonymous wrote:Looks like it is not over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the verdict in CW v Read is shameful - I despair for the future of our justice system if crowdsourced innocence fraud campaigns are going to rule the day.

Ah well, I guess it will only be the wealthy whites who get a pass on killing cops and other people, no worries.

I knew nothing about this case until this year. The CW did not prove their case, period.

Yes they did. Alec Murdaugh was convicted on the same sort of evidence.

The issue was the noise and distractions caused by the behavior of the Alberts et. al, and Proctor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A dead body in your yard isn’t cause??? He was INSIDE that house that night. He didn’t just walk by.

Cause for what?

THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THAT HE EVER ENTERED THAT HOUSE. MORE THAN A DOZEN WITNESSES PLUS DIGITAL DATA ARGUE AGAINST HIM EVER ENTERING THE HOUSE. KAREN HERSELF NEVER CLAIMED HE ENTERED THE HOUSE UNTIL MORE THAN A YEAR LATER WHEN SHE COOKED UP HER INNOCENCE FRAUD CAMPAIGN.

KAREN READ KILLED JOHN O'KEEFE. PERIOD.

Anonymous wrote:Karens a nut job. I hope she's found guilty soon since clearly she's the one who did it. She should never get out of prison. Ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wasn’t the house ever part of the investigation????? If someone was found dead on my front yard, I assume the police would like to rule out that it happened in my house.

Actually, no. If there is not probable cause there will not be a warrant issued to search your house. Especially in this case as JOK was found in the snow with taillights around him and one of the women claiming she hit him.

You keep repeating this nonsense. Did anyone actually TRY to get a warrant??

Please speak to any attorney that is willing to discuss this with you. Or better yet reread the constitution and reflect on our basic rights to not be subject to government searches without probable cause. There was zero basis to get a warrant to search the house.

I’m an attorney. You’re clearly a POS who doesn’t care about people’s rights. You’re a thug

???? Isn’t caring about rights being scrupulous about not overreaching with warrants??Caselaw to support a warrant in this situation???

News flash. They could have gotten a warrant. There was cause.

News flash. Defendants have rights too. Not just cops.

Stop cosplaying someone who knows or cares about rights. You just wanted to see her burn because you think cops should be entitled to do whatever they want.

Like drunk driving around and acting like morons and thugs

You must be a terrible attorney if you think there was probable cause to seek a warrant for that house - there most definitely absolutely WAS NOT, and that is a fact pretty much universally acknowledged by every Commonwealth attorney who has commented on the case.

That said, law enforcement was welcomed into the home by the homeowners minutes after John's body was 'found' (Karen knew exactly where he was, because she hit him and left him there) and LEOs were in the house repeatedly that day. There was zero evidence that anything untoward happened in that house, this is just another red herring of the innocence fraud campaign.

Again, you're a terrible lawyer. I sincerely hope you are not practicing criminal law.

You must not be an attorney at all if you think they couldn’t have found PC to search the house. They likely didnt because they were cops and everyone knows it.

In this case:
• O’Keefe’s last known location was the house.
• He was found mortally injured outside it.
• There were people inside who admitted he had planned to visit.
• There were inconsistencies and delays in some witness statements.

= PC

Unfortunately they had tunnel vision and focused on karen without actually INVESTIGATING.

You want to be mad, be mad at the CW.

What "things to be seized" do you feel the police should have listed in an application for a search warrant? That is, what things should they have looked for inside that house?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wasn’t the house ever part of the investigation????? If someone was found dead on my front yard, I assume the police would like to rule out that it happened in my house.

Actually, no. If there is not probable cause there will not be a warrant issued to search your house. Especially in this case as JOK was found in the snow with taillights around him and one of the women claiming she hit him.

You keep repeating this nonsense. Did anyone actually TRY to get a warrant??

Please speak to any attorney that is willing to discuss this with you. Or better yet reread the constitution and reflect on our basic rights to not be subject to government searches without probable cause. There was zero basis to get a warrant to search the house.

I’m an attorney. You’re clearly a POS who doesn’t care about people’s rights. You’re a thug

???? Isn’t caring about rights being scrupulous about not overreaching with warrants??Caselaw to support a warrant in this situation???

News flash. They could have gotten a warrant. There was cause.

News flash. Defendants have rights too. Not just cops.

Stop cosplaying someone who knows or cares about rights. You just wanted to see her burn because you think cops should be entitled to do whatever they want.

Like drunk driving around and acting like morons and thugs

You must be a terrible attorney if you think there was probable cause to seek a warrant for that house - there most definitely absolutely WAS NOT, and that is a fact pretty much universally acknowledged by every Commonwealth attorney who has commented on the case.

That said, law enforcement was welcomed into the home by the homeowners minutes after John's body was 'found' (Karen knew exactly where he was, because she hit him and left him there) and LEOs were in the house repeatedly that day. There was zero evidence that anything untoward happened in that house, this is just another red herring of the innocence fraud campaign.

Again, you're a terrible lawyer. I sincerely hope you are not practicing criminal law.

You must not be an attorney at all if you think they couldn’t have found PC to search the house. They likely didnt because they were cops and everyone knows it.

In this case:
• O’Keefe’s last known location was the house.
• He was found mortally injured outside it.
• There were people inside who admitted he had planned to visit.
• There were inconsistencies and delays in some witness statements.

= PC

Unfortunately they had tunnel vision and focused on karen without actually INVESTIGATING.

You want to be mad, be mad at the CW.

What "things to be seized" do you feel the police should have listed in an application for a search warrant? That is, what things should they have looked for inside that house?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the verdict in CW v Read is shameful - I despair for the future of our justice system if crowdsourced innocence fraud campaigns are going to rule the day.

Ah well, I guess it will only be the wealthy whites who get a pass on killing cops and other people, no worries.

I knew nothing about this case until this year. The CW did not prove their case, period.

Anonymous wrote:This goes to show everyone that with money you can accomplish anything. Their online campaign worked, their bots, their fake news all of it worked. It's sick.

You're going to see the same with P diddy watch.