Attorneys for Karen Read will ask Massachusetts’s highest court to have two charges dropped following a mistrial in July. The Massachusetts woman is accused of driving drunk, hitting her Boston cop boyfriend, John O’Keefe, with her SUV, and leaving him to die in the snow outside a Canton home in January 2022. Oral arguments are scheduled for Wednesday morning at the John Adams Courthouse in Boston. Read’s attorneys plan to ask for the second-degree murder charge against her to be dismissed after they claim jurors came forward and said they all agreed she was not guilty of that specific charge.
Subscribe to Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/LawAndCrimeNetwork
STAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:
Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3y
Where To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5
Sign Up For Law&Crime’s Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletter
Read Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2Iqo
Submit Tips to Law&Crime: tips@lawandcrime.com
For Advertising Inquiries, Please Contact: sales@lawandcrime.com
For Licensing Inquiries, Please Contact: licensing@lawandcrime.com
LAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetwork
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrime
Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetwork
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrime
LAW&CRIME NETWORK PODCASTS: https://lawandcrime.com/podcasts/
SUBSCRIBE TO ALL OF LAW&CRIME NETWORK YOUTUBE CHANNELS:
Main Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz8K1occVvDTYDfFo7N5EZw
Law&Crime Shorts: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVXOqoOCYbi-iXChKAl6DTQ
Channel B: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXCLaaClAWQiTkl3pw9ZdLw
Channel C: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMV3pzWIhJGLYzoHyxBjjNw
Omg let her go. Karen is innocent.
How hard is it to ask the jury to answer if they were in agreement to any charges lol
The judge should’ve done this but didn’t
Because then you get into the issue of them giving no indication of that. But you could argue that asking that is illegally inquiring into the deliberative process
@@blakekaveny disagree- asking if they indeed reached a unanimous verdict on specific charges isn’t inquiring into their deliberative processes. It’s an inquiry regarding whether their deliberative processes yielded a verdict.
@ well that’s what the court is gonna have to decide.
If the judge had simply said “have you come to a conclusion on any of the three counts?“ Then a lot of this mess would not be happening right now. I don’t understand why they didn’t appeal on the basis of either the judge erred in the instructions, or the jury didn’t follow the instructions. The jury four person himself – said to not fill out the verdict form until they reach a conclusion on all three counts! That’s an issue. Also, if I was a lawyer, I would continue to say “this is a precedent setting issue because we don’t have caselaw that goes into any of the territory we are describing here.“ also, the judge said not to fill out the verdict form until they had come to a decision on all 3 counts. It sounds like that was a bigger part of the problem here.
I actually think—no matter what you believe on Karen Read’s guilt or innocence— that this could actually change some of the verbiage in the current statute and case laws here.
I believe they SHOULD change the language in the statute/case laws they’re citing here, to read “must”instead of “may.” Having the judge ask about the different counts when requesting the juries final decision.
This is 100% Judge Bev’s fault. No criminal defendant should be stripped of their most basic constitutional protections by an utterly incompetent judge.
Free Karen Read. F*** the Alberts, McCabes, Higgins,CPD,SPD