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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The butt dials are what clinches it for me-it’s reasonable doubt to many no matter how much it enrages you, former prosecutor/defender/GUSL grad/Mayflower descendant lady!

It's only reasonable doubt to a moron.

The last jury did not believe even a tiny, wee little bit in the defense's third party culprit theory of the case.

Doesn’t matter! I know that really burns you up, hon-thoughts and prayers!

Yeah, I'm put off by miserable idiots like you casting aspersions on the justice system in defense of a psycho drunken rage killer. You have a nonfunctioning moral compass, poster. I hope somebody you love gets horrifically murdered and you spend years being vilified and harassed by a mob of idiots like yourself, see how you like it.

Have a normal one, I see. And nice moral compass you have there too!

My moral compass leaves me sickened when people like you celebrate the abhorrent mess surrounding this case and the disgusting amoral killer at the heart of it - KAREN READ. You probably fantasize about a) her blowing you, or b) going clothes shopping with her. Psycho.

Ma’am, this is still an Arby’s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The butt dials are what clinches it for me-it’s reasonable doubt to many no matter how much it enrages you, former prosecutor/defender/GUSL grad/Mayflower descendant lady!

It's only reasonable doubt to a moron.

The last jury did not believe even a tiny, wee little bit in the defense's third party culprit theory of the case.

Doesn’t matter! I know that really burns you up, hon-thoughts and prayers!

Yeah, I'm put off by miserable idiots like you casting aspersions on the justice system in defense of a psycho drunken rage killer. You have a nonfunctioning moral compass, poster. I hope somebody you love gets horrifically murdered and you spend years being vilified and harassed by a mob of idiots like yourself, see how you like it.

Have a normal one, I see. And nice moral compass you have there too!

My moral compass leaves me sickened when people like you celebrate the abhorrent mess surrounding this case and the disgusting amoral killer at the heart of it - KAREN READ. You probably fantasize about a) her blowing you, or b) going clothes shopping with her. Psycho.

Anonymous wrote:Nope, not following.

Sounds like a $hit$how.

What documentary would instant with, if any are good.?.

Anonymous wrote:I would like to see a reconstruction video of where everyone’s car was and at what time, bc my understanding is there were between two and four (maybe even five?) cars at the house that night. So who was parked where and when, and would Karen even have been able to back into John due to other cars being there or for him to land in that spot? Did they even check everyone else’s car given several were at the crime scene when it occurred and the prosecution says he was hit by a car?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The defense is no defense. Im waiting to hear their explanation as to his hair and dna on the bumper and the glass shards from the glass he was holding on the bumper. Its gonna be amazing!!!!

The DNA can be explained by him closing the back grill of the SUV, which he surely did at some point given that they weee practically living together.

The hair has all kinds of problems with how it was tested. If it’s even his, which is dubious since it would have had to have survived the drive to Dighton (and back on the tow truck) in a blizzard, then it could also have been there from normal shedding when he was around the car.

IIRC The glass on the bumper isn’t a match for the bar glass. Which actually helps the defense because then where did it come from? Answer: Michael Proctor.

And if it was a match, he threw it at the SUV as she was leaving.

He had NO BRUISES on his body below his head. You can’t get hit by an SUV and not get a bruise. He wasn’t hit by a car.

Additionally, he locked his phone at 12:32 and she connects to the home wifi at 12:36. It’s a six minute drive when you know where you’re going and the weather is good, neither of which are true.

I don’t know what happened but she didn’t kill him. Straight up.

How much did your tinfoil hat cost? 🤡

Anonymous wrote:Defense atty looks petty, without having actual proof his client didn't do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The defense is no defense. Im waiting to hear their explanation as to his hair and dna on the bumper and the glass shards from the glass he was holding on the bumper. Its gonna be amazing!!!!

The DNA can be explained by him closing the back grill of the SUV, which he surely did at some point given that they weee practically living together.

The hair has all kinds of problems with how it was tested. If it’s even his, which is dubious since it would have had to have survived the drive to Dighton (and back on the tow truck) in a blizzard, then it could also have been there from normal shedding when he was around the car.

IIRC The glass on the bumper isn’t a match for the bar glass. Which actually helps the defense because then where did it come from? Answer: Michael Proctor.

And if it was a match, he threw it at the SUV as she was leaving.

He had NO BRUISES on his body below his head. You can’t get hit by an SUV and not get a bruise. He wasn’t hit by a car.

Additionally, he locked his phone at 12:32 and she connects to the home wifi at 12:36. It’s a six minute drive when you know where you’re going and the weather is good, neither of which are true.

I don’t know what happened but she didn’t kill him. Straight up.

Anonymous wrote:The defense is no defense. Im waiting to hear their explanation as to his hair and dna on the bumper and the glass shards from the glass he was holding on the bumper. Its gonna be amazing!!!!