- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:08 am to JDPndahizzy
Legitimate question, If KR is found not guilty, will that kind of force the DA into investigating the Alberts and what took place that night?
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:10 am to JDPndahizzy
quote:
If KR is found not guilty, will that kind of force the DA into investigating the Alberts and what took place that night?
Force? No. They seem to be pretty tied to their version of events, they'll probably just walk away from the case all together.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:10 am to JDPndahizzy
quote:
Legitimate question, If KR is found not guilty, will that kind of force the DA into investigating the Alberts and what took place that night?
I think that ship has sailed.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:11 am to JDPndahizzy
quote:
I'm assuming you can go into a phone and see past IOS versions and dates they were downloaded?
I really don't know, that's what I'm wondering.
This post was edited on 4/23/25 at 9:12 am
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:24 am to Dandy Chiggins
quote:
3. Assuming he stood still……
Driving a car sober at 10 mph in reverse isn’t normal. 25 mph in reverse is difficult; while drunk and hitting a target seems like it would be a pretty hard.
There isn't a single chance in hell that Karen, as many drinks as she is alleged to have had, drove in reverse for more than 30 feet, at 25 MPH, in a straight line and hit JOK. It's not plausible.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:31 am to LSBoosie
Maybe it was Safari. I just know they made sure to point out it was searched using a search engine not google and Safari is an actual search engine so it might have been Safari.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:33 am to LSBoosie
I put it on for the first time today and as soon as I logged in they announced a break.. 
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:37 am to MFn GIMP
quote:
There isn't a single chance in hell that Karen, as many drinks as she is alleged to have had, drove in reverse for more than 30 feet, at 25 MPH, in a straight line and hit JOK. It's not plausible.
I grok'd it. Grok said the car would take about 60-65 feet in reverse to reach 25 mph. Petal to the metal.
Which is even more unbelievable.
I have a long driveway and always back in, I occasionally will get up to 10-15 mph..... (Before I have to slow down)
I honestly cant imagine 25mph....much less drunk.....
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:42 am to LSBoosie
I think the most damning thing the prosecution has shown so far is the picture of the back of Karen Read's car from John's driveway. I'm curious as to when they will really dive into that.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:43 am to Dandy Chiggins
Are you questioning whether she went 24 mph in reverse? I think that was information they gathered from her vehicle. It showed a max speed of 24 mph in reverse at a time that was identical to the time of the recording.. I think. But I am pretty sure they did retrieve the data from her vehicle.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:43 am to Dandy Chiggins
1 other thing for me, that is certainly open to interpretation:
Her crazy calls to him that morning definitely sounded real, emotional, and genuine.
She honestly came across as a (somewhat psycho) girlfriend who believed he was shacked up somewhere. Not someone who was calling to cover tracks.....
I think it was the prosecution who played those tapes, (Maybe defense?). But if anything for me they prosecution story MORE believable.
(I dont believe she hit him; BUT even if she did, she appeared to not know it)
Her crazy calls to him that morning definitely sounded real, emotional, and genuine.
She honestly came across as a (somewhat psycho) girlfriend who believed he was shacked up somewhere. Not someone who was calling to cover tracks.....
I think it was the prosecution who played those tapes, (Maybe defense?). But if anything for me they prosecution story MORE believable.
(I dont believe she hit him; BUT even if she did, she appeared to not know it)
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:48 am to OweO
Didn't realize they had vehicle data of her going 24 mph in reverse, I must have missed that.
But I am also saying that:
Hitting a moving target (or stationary), who is presumably facing the car, at 24 mph, in reverse, on purpose, while drunk,.....
is a tough thing to do....
But I am also saying that:
Hitting a moving target (or stationary), who is presumably facing the car, at 24 mph, in reverse, on purpose, while drunk,.....
is a tough thing to do....
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:52 am to Dandy Chiggins
quote:
She honestly came across as a (somewhat psycho) girlfriend who believed he was shacked up somewhere. Not someone who was calling to cover tracks.....
I agree with this, but I think what makes her seem psycho is that her life from that night has been exposed. What I mean is.. I think her behavior is somewhat normal for someone who had been drinking..
I thought it was funny when O'Keefe's neighbor was put on the stand and she was talking about her relationship with him and she said something like "we would have drinks from time to time". That whole group likes to knock them back. I guess that's the Irish in them.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:52 am to Dandy Chiggins
quote:
who is presumably facing the car
The CW claim is that Officer John O'Keefe was hit on his right side by the passenger side of the vehicle. So that would mean John had his back to the approaching vehicle.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:53 am to Dandy Chiggins
Did you watch the HBO series? If not, I think that's where they talk about that part.. recovering the data from her vehicle.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:56 am to civiltiger07
quote:
The CW claim is that Officer John O'Keefe was hit on his right side by the passenger side of the vehicle.
My understanding is they claim the vehicle only hit the outstretched arm from JOK's behind since there is no other physical injury to the body (there is some to the back of the head and face).
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:58 am to KosmoCramer
Is that someone's cell phone going off?
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:58 am to KosmoCramer
quote:
My understanding is they claim the vehicle only hit the outstretched arm from JOK's behind since there is no other physical injury to the body
that was the claim in the first trail.
However, the CW has pointed out a few times already in trail 2 that "all of Officer John O'Keefe's injuries were on the right side of his body". I wonder if their theory will be slightly different for this trail?
Posted on 4/23/25 at 10:00 am to Dandy Chiggins
quote:I have seen some say this could have been when the vehicle was being moved by others and the wheels were spinning in the snow.
Didn't realize they had vehicle data of her going 24 mph in reverse
Page 41 of 47
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News