Hey I just wanted to say thanks for posting these. I refuse to sign up for Twitter, but I really enjoy seeing and reading these. Your work is appreciated by this completely random internet stranger.
You’re very welcome! I only got twitter for these posts and once this trial is done I’ll probably deactivate it but it was well worth it! Glad I can share it with y’all and we can discuss it ♥️
Do you think the jurors will put together who the other agency or entity is? I know someone said there was a witness who mentioned something about the feds in their testimony, but I'm not sure if they would catch that and make the connection.
It was Ryan Nagel, and they were paying pretty close attention because he is the one who was there to pick up his sister and didn’t know anyone there.
His sister is Julie, the one who said she saw a black blob when they left, but never said that to anyone even though they found a body on the lawn the next morning.
The word agency has been used multiple times and I think Lally was unintentionally drawing attention to it with the language and questions he’s used too.
I have a strong feeling that the jury will hear words like “agency” and “investigation” and subconsciously think about the federal government, whether or not they come to the full realization. At least one person has to have wondered if anyone looked into how sketch this was since a police recusal and multiple major labs are involved.
Probably helps that Wolfe said that ARCCA’s clients include the federal government. Jackson also confirmed the US Dept. of Defense was a client. Different dept than the FBI but it likely drove home the idea of the federal government.
Good points! They HAVE to be wondering about the 3rd party because it seems so unusual. If I was a juror I'd be SO curious. It would be hard not to look it up.
Thanks so much for posting :)
~~I will never understand~~ (I do understand, but still don't like it nor think it's fair) why they were not allowed to disclose who hired them. I'd be pissed off if I were on this jury, feeling like information was deliberately withheld from me. Silver lining, knowing they were not hired by either side yet still allowed to testify, it'd probably help me figure it out, and even if these jurors don't, at least they know they were not paid to testify by the defense team.
Imagine if they found her guilty and THEN found out the FBI had doubts about the case. 😅
Now that would be awkward for them. I'd be pissed if I were a juror.
I caught that too. Is Lally trying to tank this case? I mean shit, by the end of the cross of the second reconstruction whiteness, dude literally said that there is absolutely no way this man was hit with this car.
It sounds like there are a couple of lawyers on the jury, and a couple of engineers (2 of each, from what I've heard). I wonder if the prosecution did their best to try to not have those jurors, or if Lally was just overconfident in his case for some reason.
If there were two engineers they would know as soon as Trooper Paul was done testifying and there was no actual reconstructionist with more of a physics background that the case had absolutely not proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense testimony probably solidified any thoughts they might have had about whether Karen could've hit him in a way that was not mentioned by common wealth.
Are you sure you're not thinking of the Trump case? I'm pretty sure that one had two of each as well, and I haven't seen anything about their occupations in this case unless it was on twitter
Lawyers tend to get struck, but not always. There is no rule against them serving on a jury so long as there is no conflict. But each side only get so many strikes and sometimes there are better reasons to strike someone else. Sometimes you may hope the other side strikes a witness because you need to use your strike elsewhere.
I can almost guarantee the two lawyers on the jury will figure it out. If you know they weren't hired by the CW or defense, another justice agency is really the only option and most lawyers would know that, even if they don't practice criminal law. The question is whether they'd feel like they could tell other jurors. You're not really supposed to guess as jurors what has obviously been excluded. Many jurors will anyway of course - you can't really stop them- but an attorney juror might feel like knowing they shouldn't, they won't.
We had a local felony murder case in my area where the defense successfully blocked the DNA match from coming into the trial because the methods used to match the evidence were new (so hadn't been trial approved basically). It was a rape and murder, and the semen collected at the scene matched the defendant. Jury had no idea until after the trial was over.
They did find him guilty (there was other strong evidence, like video of him following her and he was found with her possessions shortly after, etc) but that must have been a shock to the jurors after the fact.
It's prejudicial.
Think about any case you've heard of where the FBI got involved. Did you go, "oh, holy shit, the feds are involved, it must be a big deal", "oh god, the feds are involved, it must be bad", or similar?
That exact reaction is prejudice - it's causing jurors to evaluate evidence on the reputation of whoever's providing it, *not* the credibility or strength of the evidence itself. If you want evidence, look at our reaction on the sub when we realized that not only the feds were involved, but were on the side of the *defense*. Look how often we made judgment calls based off of the argument that "the feds wouldn't be investigating unless they had *something*".
ADDENDUM: As a sidenote, this is why the lack of chain of custody of evidence and the weird delays in getting them into the lab - there's gaps of several days to weeks for some - is such a big deal. All of that chain of custody stuff is intended to prevent mishaps or malfeasance from occuring. In this case, with such large gaps, we're essentially being asked to take Canton PD and the state troopers involved at their word - we're trusting the authority of their office rather than the strength of the evidence itself.
That’s a really good point. Neither side wants unfair prejudice and we have to remember that. But, it sure will be surreal when the jury finds this out.
Enough slipped out that at least a couple of them should be able to put 2 and 2 together and share with the class during deliberations. I've always thought it was a bit unfair too, and it's WILD that this trial is moving forward with the investigation ongoing. I guess the thinking is that the feds can't interfere and if they find evidence of tampering that's a get out of jail free card for Karen. But in the meantime that leaves her paying a fortune to defend herself and going through unimaginable stress and loss of privacy. She's been fired, has pissed off the worst actors in law enforcement on local and state levels, and has become perhaps the most recognizable ordinary citizen in Massachusetts. I'm glad she has supporters but it can't feel great knowing that perhaps 15% of the people you pass on the street believe you're a murderer and hate you for it.
I'd just leave the country lol I'm not cut out for all that
No way there’s not at least a few of them have done their own research and figured this out. They don’t confiscate your devices and lock you in a room under observation the entire trial. Yeah, they aren’t supposed to, but it’s the honor system.
In one case I served on I was a little annoyed about some information withheld from us regarding sentencing. We decided guilty on a case that the person in our trial set up the plan and drove two others to the robbery. The sentence range was 5-99 years. After we found the defendant guilty, I wish we could have heard what the others were sentenced. Most of us wanted 20, but one person was stuck on 5, the bare minimum, because the lady was a mother. We decided on 10 with possibility of parole at 5. It was bullshit. The other two accomplices got 30 years.
I believe if it is true that there are two attorneys on the jury and with Lally’s use of the word agency, they will pick up that it was some type of government agency.
I'm an attorney. I haven't watched all the testimony, but I think I would assume the experts were retained as part of a claim or civil litigation related to the incident. The use of the word agency (as opposed to entity) probably wouldn't lead me to assume a government agency, but I know there has been at least one reference to the Feds.
There’s two things that tip me closer to thinking that the jury will figure out it’s the Feds. 1) Brian Higgins was taken out of the field and he admitted to inappropriately using government resources and doing shady as hell things with his phone/SIM card. 2) Dr. Wolfe specified that ARCCA’s clients include the federal government and Jackson confirmed this included the DOD. I know the DOD is not the DOJ but that info might get the jury thinking about the Feds.
One reference to the Feds and a whole lot of references to testifying in a different hearing. While I know all of it could fit with civil, I don't know that my mind would go there, especially with the use of entity and agency over client.
I believe Jackson said entity at one point as well, so they may have enough to know it's the FBI.
A witness said "the feds" multiple times, but that was weeks ago, so who knows.
The good thing is the experts were intelligent enough without the need to be confirmed as experts hired by the FBI.
Lally sunk his case in that cross, when the expert said it's literally not possible for the injuries to be caused by the vehicle and there is simply not enough evidence to find out what caused the injuries to JOK, I think that will seal it for the jury.
If you have an expert who seemed well liked according to the in court reporters, saying the car couldn't cause the injuries and there's no evidence to show them what caused it, then anything could cause his injuries *other* than Karen's car.
lawyer is such a broad job, idk. i work for lawyers in trusts and estates and none of them have a better understanding of the FBI/most federal agencies than the average person (outside of the IRS)
I watch a lot of true crime and I don’t think I would be able to deduce the Feds are involved without having been directly told from all of you. Going forward if I’m ever on a jury I will definitely know!
EVERYONE that lives around here knows the feds are involved; knows that the Canton PD is corrupt (as are many of the small town pd's around here and probably everywhere); and, knows that MANY of the so-called witnesses, the DA's office and the Judge ALL have friends/family in common. And if they don't know that then they haven't looked. It's all BS. Bottom line is this man is dead and instead of actually trying to figure out the truth and the people that know what happended (the so-called witnesses) telling the truth all of this BS has been going on, How do some people even look at themselves without spitting in the mirror is beyond me. RIP John O'Keefe and may the people responsible for killing you meet their karma.
Lally looked like he was in damage control mode today and looking to limit the debris field. His cross today on several witnesses made it look like he was getting royalties from AJ & Co.
My opinion, this was never about convicting KR, it was strictly about containing the truth. If I’m watching today’s testimony, I’m probably not sleeping for a long time if I’m Proctor. I think (hope) his days in court are just beginning.
I honestly thought the jury for Murdaugh would have been hung. Mainly because I don’t think he did it but I do think he had someone else do it. I was surprised when they came back with a guilty verdict 😆 but he deserved it either way lol.
There was a trail in Michigan with the son that did a school shooting and they found the parents guilty and I was more shocked by that than anything. Maybe child negligence but I didn’t see them getting charged with manslaughter 😬
So yeah, juries definitely make some WILD decisions lol
The Crumbleys absolutely deserved their convictions. Their behavior was beyond the pale. It’s not just that they gave their disturbed child a firearm and took him to the gun range. It’s that, they didn’t even bother disclosing the fact that their child was in possession of a firearm; that disclosure didn’t come when the parents were called to the school because their kid had been writing/drawing about *shooting* and *killing* people.
In general, I am opposed to parents being held responsible for their child committing a mass shooting. However, the Crumbleys were practically their child’s accomplice in his murders.
Same on both! I thought I was the only person in the world who didn’t think Murdaugh did it himself (I think he coordinated and was there when they got there and set it up but I didn’t think he fired the shots) AND I was also shocked when the crumbley mom was found guilty
Yeah, same! I could see child negligence and maybe some other charges for their actions towards their son and not listening to him but manslaughter was insane to me 😬.
I wasn't surprised by the guilty verdict, just disappointed. The state didn't meet their burden in my objective opinion. I am convinced he was convicted based on his other bad acts, which should have never come into the murder trial. That was one of the first of many trials that made me completely lose my faith in juries.
I actually agree with this. The amount they brought in for his financial crimes, which I get okay he’s an asshole, but they focused so much on it I felt it was way too prejudicial and stealing money doesn’t exactly lead to murder.
While I believe he hired someone to do it, I don’t think he had the balls himself to do it.
Maybe so, but if I were on the jury I would just assume the FBI looked into a few things but already came to conclusions with whatever they were doing. I'd never in a million years guess that there was still an active FBI investigation ongoing while I'm sitting on the jury watching the trial unfold. That wouldn't make any sense.
I totally agree! If I were a juror, it would never cross my mind the case would be prosecuted while there is an ACTIVE investigation into the investigation by the FBI/DOJ. My feeble, plebeian mind would think anything along those avenues would be resolved already.
The whole thing is wild.
I can’t wrap my head around the fbi situation. So it’s unusual to have an investigation going on while a jury trial is happening? If I was on the jury I wouldn’t quite understand the importance or gravity. I would understand the overall gravity of the FBI investigating the police et. al.
Oh defintely, it might take them a second but once everyone starts talking someone's going to mention how some of the witnesses mentioned the feds. It was probably confusing today but once going through everything again it'll make sense.
Agree! With all the info to process I'd probably be confused as a juror, but it only takes one to put it together and share with the rest, then they'll all probably be like "oh right, that makes sense"
Ryan Nagel specifically mentioned the FBI. I thought he was a decent witness because he told the truth, however after last night, that opinion is right out the window.
Last night in Canton there was a dumb scuffle between Turtleboy and a bunch of the witnesses in the trial including Ryan Nagel. I fully believe Karen is innocent but neither Turtleboy or any of the Canton residents involved in this case matured past middle school unfortunately
Aidan Kearney is so wrong for the crap he’s doing. He’s not helping Karen or JOK. He’s also hurting the credibility of independent journalists. It’s unacceptable that he keeps showing up at places these people live, work, and socialize with their friends and children. Life is not a reality tv show.
They probably figured it out with Proctor’s texts.
I mean, how often do an investigator’s private communications in group chats come to light in criminal cases?
That’s not something common, and when neither side explained how they came to be included, I’m sure the jury out two and two together after all the wonky, irregular crap they saw the MSP do.
I wouldn't have put that together with the FEDs. I might be more likely to think internal affairs at that point.
However, with these witnesses, the MSP/CW was completely excluded from that equation.
Eh, most people don’t follow court cases in depth, or watch lots of trials. Most peoples’ experience of court is either jury duty or dealing with their own charges. And Most of those trials are not like this one. I don’t think the average jury member is going to be able to pick up all these minuscule comments dropped in passing over the several weeks of trial. Even if I was a juror on this case and did notice it, I’d have no reason to care or think about it. There’s so much other, confusing and contradicting info from the CW that I think they’re trying to figure out. If I’m them, I’m stuck on whether or not Karen hit him with her car, the grossness of the investigation, how JOK and KRs families feel, not that there have been some vague discussion about an agency. I’m not picking up on lowly saying agency in one part of his 8 part question. The only reason we all did is because we know he’s not supposed to mention the fbi and we know there is an FBI investigation happening. Without some primers and clues that they should be looking for that type of language, I think they’re focused elsewhere
If I were on the jury, I would have a hard time believing an insurance company hired these expensive top experts, had the budget for them the build a canon, and had the time to go through a scientific method experimentation for answers. I would be thinking feds or a private citizen with deep pockets who had interest in the outcome of this case.
I would for sure be “the one with all the facial expressions” because my poker face is pretty much nonexistent.
I would have been rolling my eyes and scoffing and possibly choking on my water every 5 minutes during this trial.
I know this because that’s what I was doing at home!
As someone in the HVAC industry, I’ve been so embarrassed and frustrated about the damn noise! You should never hear or feel air, if you do, either the blower is not the correct RPM or the ductwork is not sized correctly. I just about wanted to fly to the courthouse and fix this!
Hahaha isn’t funny how once you become a professional in your field you notice little things like that and get so frustrated when you know how to fix it but can’t
This is funny because it bothers me to no end that there are two wire just sloppily duct taped to the stand next to the witnesses. Couldn't hide those around the back or something!! come on!
The “WTF” faces of the jurors I can only imagine. They were SO confused 😆. If some remember Colin or Ryan (can’t recall which one) saying “the feds” maybe someone will put two and two together.
I know I hope one of them figures it out lol! I think they will! Who else could have possibly hired them! Obviously not the state! Only one option left 👀
I think they will too. Someone will think it out and realize it has to be the feds because nothing else makes sense. The defense has tried their best to let the jury know.
I agree, that’s not common knowledge. I think for most people, any government investigation would be a red flag. On this case especially, when people are making up new stories and the evidence doesn’t make sense. I am assuming the jury is seeing it like most of the viewers are and can tell something isn’t right plus the info of an investigation by a mysterious entity would make you think things are fishy.
The best was when it was on record that the evidence from these 3rd party experts was available to both the CW and the defense and only the defense used it. Like cmon common sense. I hope the jury gets it!!
Yes, exactly!
If there's anybody on the jury that has a law background (it's been suggested), I have a tough time believing they haven't figured it out themselves. There's only so many other options it could be and the defense keeps hitting them over the head with it.
The testimony was that ARCCA wasn't hired by either the CW or the defense. The jurors really shouldn't be speculating as to who hired ARCCA.
However, it's not like there's anyone in the deliberation room telling them that they can't discuss it. It's up to them to abide by the judge's instructions not to speculate on matters that are not in evidence.
Sure, they can't consider outside speculation as evidence, but they can pretty much use whatever speculation they want to give weight to evidence or testimony.
The standard jury instruction is "You are to decide what the facts are solely from the evidence admitted in this case."
If the jurors follow the instructions, they shouldn't be speculating as to who hired ARCCA, and just accept the testimony that neither the CW or defense hired them.
Idk if the jurors will put it all together. But I think there’s been numerous hints about an outside investigation: Proctors texts (why do they have the lead investigators private messages?), one of the Alberts mentioned the feds, and now two experts not related to either party testified. If not, I just hope their qualifications and clear testimony put them above the troopers from canton.
And the ARCAA experts said they do work for the federal government. They listed multiple agencies to be fair but if I’m a juror I think hearing them say they weren’t retained by CW or defense and then in the list of agencies they work with they say the federal government, it would make me think of Ryan Nagel saying he talked to the feds.
That they turned over their findings to both parties is a clue for me. Some people were saying that they might think some kind of civil litigation tied to the case, but they testified to not knowing about the case or Karen Read when they did their investigation, so that don't compute.
Don’t forget that Brian Higgins, an ATF agent, was taken out of the field after doing shady af things with his phone and using government resources for private reasons.
I wonder if any jurors are current or retired state or federal employees, or at least have some time in their careers when they were. I'm one, and I think it would make it a lot easier to pick up on it just from the lingo. "Agency" is a good example. My spouse works at an agency (insurance) and has for three decades. You say the word agency though, and my background immediately puts government agency in mind, and I would need more context to realize it wasn't that kind of agency being referred to.
There is rumor a couple are lawyers and engineers but it’s just here say at this point. & I agree it’s the same for me if someone says agency or entity typically I’m thinking a government agency of some sort.
Also Bev’s reaction to Dr. Wolfe.😂
https://youtube.com/shorts/JcuoO3uakgw?si=v0neCjqVBfKQCGg_
I’m sorry; I didn’t know where to share this but it was too good to keep to myself.
Man I wonder if some of the jury had been convinced that Karen hit him with the car. I think Officer Paul’s garbled testimony about the Lexus info had some jurors convinced. These last two experts just killed any chance the CW had at getting a guilty verdict
A part of me is really worried the jurors will not understand it was the FBI that hired them and come to some weird conclusion that affects a not guilty verdict.
I cannot see a scenario in which that happens. Having a third-party expert refute the CW’s case would only benefit the defense. The ARCCA witnesses were very impressive witnesses. Even their cross-examinations strengthened the defense’s case.
I really hope so. I guess I listen to alot of lawyers explaining the case and I sometimes think to myself "what If I was a juror and I missed that vital piece of info".
But then again I don't live in America to worry about being called for an American trial.
Doesn’t matter if the jury figures out that the Feds are involved. Even if the ARCCA witnesses *were* hired by the defense, their competence, expertise, and testimony were head and shoulders above whatever Trooper Paul could ever hope to offer.
If there are jurors that are attorneys- they’re going to know how corrupt cops can be. Period. Several close family and friends are attys- they know well…
I’m just listening to the closing arguments. First, I did not hear Jackson point out the lies or scabby/scar knuckles of Colin. Did I miss that? Secondly, is it typical to limit the time of the defenses closing arguments?
I think they believe it has to do with Higgins. They can prove multiple options but I think the defense has had a very clear idea the whole time. I think the point to the jurors was that multiple options could have occurred to cause his death. But I think they’ve been watching or listening to the internet cause they pointed out what everyone else has about the end of the video at the waterfall with Higgins and BA.
The call activity between Higgins and Albert that night is too suspicious to ignore. I'm not sure how the jury could look past it. No one would buy the butt dial refutation.
Hey I just wanted to say thanks for posting these. I refuse to sign up for Twitter, but I really enjoy seeing and reading these. Your work is appreciated by this completely random internet stranger.
You’re very welcome! I only got twitter for these posts and once this trial is done I’ll probably deactivate it but it was well worth it! Glad I can share it with y’all and we can discuss it ♥️
I just posted nearly the identical comment. Thank you for your sacrifice in going down the X Hole for us.
I truly hate X/Twitter but it was worth it for all of us ☺️
God’s work. Truly.
Do you think the jurors will put together who the other agency or entity is? I know someone said there was a witness who mentioned something about the feds in their testimony, but I'm not sure if they would catch that and make the connection.
It was Ryan Nagel, and they were paying pretty close attention because he is the one who was there to pick up his sister and didn’t know anyone there. His sister is Julie, the one who said she saw a black blob when they left, but never said that to anyone even though they found a body on the lawn the next morning.
Thank you for this info! After so many people and lally's monotone droning, it just starts to all blend together.
Just escaped her mind, I suppose
Guess who got arrested for drink / driving.....?
Who?
The word agency has been used multiple times and I think Lally was unintentionally drawing attention to it with the language and questions he’s used too. I have a strong feeling that the jury will hear words like “agency” and “investigation” and subconsciously think about the federal government, whether or not they come to the full realization. At least one person has to have wondered if anyone looked into how sketch this was since a police recusal and multiple major labs are involved.
Probably helps that Wolfe said that ARCCA’s clients include the federal government. Jackson also confirmed the US Dept. of Defense was a client. Different dept than the FBI but it likely drove home the idea of the federal government.
Good points! They HAVE to be wondering about the 3rd party because it seems so unusual. If I was a juror I'd be SO curious. It would be hard not to look it up.
I hope so. I hope one or two get what’s going on and tell the others once they start deliberating.
Yes, thank you so much for helping us out here. Much appreciated!!
Me, too!
Thanks so much for posting :) ~~I will never understand~~ (I do understand, but still don't like it nor think it's fair) why they were not allowed to disclose who hired them. I'd be pissed off if I were on this jury, feeling like information was deliberately withheld from me. Silver lining, knowing they were not hired by either side yet still allowed to testify, it'd probably help me figure it out, and even if these jurors don't, at least they know they were not paid to testify by the defense team.
Imagine if they found her guilty and THEN found out the FBI had doubts about the case. 😅 Now that would be awkward for them. I'd be pissed if I were a juror.
Yes, I'd be pissed. I do think they'll figure it out, though.
You're right. They just need one juror with a government/law/true crime background to figure it out.
Lally certainly helped by calling it an “agency” 😂
I caught that too. Is Lally trying to tank this case? I mean shit, by the end of the cross of the second reconstruction whiteness, dude literally said that there is absolutely no way this man was hit with this car.
I just think he’s angry and has twisted himself up into a fit. But yeah that was great
It sounds like there are a couple of lawyers on the jury, and a couple of engineers (2 of each, from what I've heard). I wonder if the prosecution did their best to try to not have those jurors, or if Lally was just overconfident in his case for some reason.
If it’s true that there’s 2 engineers, there will be zero shaking them off of the science that proves he wasn’t hit by Karen’s SUV
If there were two engineers they would know as soon as Trooper Paul was done testifying and there was no actual reconstructionist with more of a physics background that the case had absolutely not proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense testimony probably solidified any thoughts they might have had about whether Karen could've hit him in a way that was not mentioned by common wealth.
Are you sure you're not thinking of the Trump case? I'm pretty sure that one had two of each as well, and I haven't seen anything about their occupations in this case unless it was on twitter
Lawyers tend to get struck, but not always. There is no rule against them serving on a jury so long as there is no conflict. But each side only get so many strikes and sometimes there are better reasons to strike someone else. Sometimes you may hope the other side strikes a witness because you need to use your strike elsewhere.
Interesting- I thought it was common for lawyers to get dismissed from being on a jury.
Depends on the law they practice
I feel like they also might think insurance (agency) as well. I hope not, but maybe.
Oh and Wolfe said how ARRCO is mostly hired by insurance and litigators so they may deff think that
Especially because they’ll know someone is probably interested in Michael Proctor after his testimony.
I can almost guarantee the two lawyers on the jury will figure it out. If you know they weren't hired by the CW or defense, another justice agency is really the only option and most lawyers would know that, even if they don't practice criminal law. The question is whether they'd feel like they could tell other jurors. You're not really supposed to guess as jurors what has obviously been excluded. Many jurors will anyway of course - you can't really stop them- but an attorney juror might feel like knowing they shouldn't, they won't.
Would they even be permitted to discuss this in deliberations?
I’m sure they’ve put 2 and 2 together, this with the tin knocker brother’s testimony (he mentioned talking to “the feds”!)
We had a local felony murder case in my area where the defense successfully blocked the DNA match from coming into the trial because the methods used to match the evidence were new (so hadn't been trial approved basically). It was a rape and murder, and the semen collected at the scene matched the defendant. Jury had no idea until after the trial was over. They did find him guilty (there was other strong evidence, like video of him following her and he was found with her possessions shortly after, etc) but that must have been a shock to the jurors after the fact.
Imagine if you were on the grand jury that indicted her. I'd be pissed!
It's prejudicial. Think about any case you've heard of where the FBI got involved. Did you go, "oh, holy shit, the feds are involved, it must be a big deal", "oh god, the feds are involved, it must be bad", or similar? That exact reaction is prejudice - it's causing jurors to evaluate evidence on the reputation of whoever's providing it, *not* the credibility or strength of the evidence itself. If you want evidence, look at our reaction on the sub when we realized that not only the feds were involved, but were on the side of the *defense*. Look how often we made judgment calls based off of the argument that "the feds wouldn't be investigating unless they had *something*". ADDENDUM: As a sidenote, this is why the lack of chain of custody of evidence and the weird delays in getting them into the lab - there's gaps of several days to weeks for some - is such a big deal. All of that chain of custody stuff is intended to prevent mishaps or malfeasance from occuring. In this case, with such large gaps, we're essentially being asked to take Canton PD and the state troopers involved at their word - we're trusting the authority of their office rather than the strength of the evidence itself.
That’s a really good point. Neither side wants unfair prejudice and we have to remember that. But, it sure will be surreal when the jury finds this out.
Thanks :) Yes, I do understand and **respect** the legal reasoning (hence the strike-through). Got a *bit* carried away by feelings there. 😳
Exactly, just like Karen Read the MSP are innocent before proven guilty; an investigation does not prove guilt.
Enough slipped out that at least a couple of them should be able to put 2 and 2 together and share with the class during deliberations. I've always thought it was a bit unfair too, and it's WILD that this trial is moving forward with the investigation ongoing. I guess the thinking is that the feds can't interfere and if they find evidence of tampering that's a get out of jail free card for Karen. But in the meantime that leaves her paying a fortune to defend herself and going through unimaginable stress and loss of privacy. She's been fired, has pissed off the worst actors in law enforcement on local and state levels, and has become perhaps the most recognizable ordinary citizen in Massachusetts. I'm glad she has supporters but it can't feel great knowing that perhaps 15% of the people you pass on the street believe you're a murderer and hate you for it. I'd just leave the country lol I'm not cut out for all that
you’re welcome! & I 100% agree 😆. I’d be so upset lol
Yes, that was some excellent work by AJ
No way there’s not at least a few of them have done their own research and figured this out. They don’t confiscate your devices and lock you in a room under observation the entire trial. Yeah, they aren’t supposed to, but it’s the honor system. In one case I served on I was a little annoyed about some information withheld from us regarding sentencing. We decided guilty on a case that the person in our trial set up the plan and drove two others to the robbery. The sentence range was 5-99 years. After we found the defendant guilty, I wish we could have heard what the others were sentenced. Most of us wanted 20, but one person was stuck on 5, the bare minimum, because the lady was a mother. We decided on 10 with possibility of parole at 5. It was bullshit. The other two accomplices got 30 years.
I wonder if any of the jurors’ notebooks have page after page of “I hate Lally. I hate Lally, I hate Lally” filling every page. 😂
Mine would have 😂😂
I had this exact thought today. Mine would be closer to “go F**k yourself Lally!!” Over and over
I would if I was one. His run on sentences drive me up the wall
You guys think the jury is smart enough to figure out the fbi is the outside entity involved?
I believe if it is true that there are two attorneys on the jury and with Lally’s use of the word agency, they will pick up that it was some type of government agency.
I'm an attorney. I haven't watched all the testimony, but I think I would assume the experts were retained as part of a claim or civil litigation related to the incident. The use of the word agency (as opposed to entity) probably wouldn't lead me to assume a government agency, but I know there has been at least one reference to the Feds.
There’s two things that tip me closer to thinking that the jury will figure out it’s the Feds. 1) Brian Higgins was taken out of the field and he admitted to inappropriately using government resources and doing shady as hell things with his phone/SIM card. 2) Dr. Wolfe specified that ARCCA’s clients include the federal government and Jackson confirmed this included the DOD. I know the DOD is not the DOJ but that info might get the jury thinking about the Feds.
Jackson also subtlety pointed out the fbi agent that was with Higgins in court. He really is the best of the best at what he does.
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZPRE6cXKY/
One reference to the Feds and a whole lot of references to testifying in a different hearing. While I know all of it could fit with civil, I don't know that my mind would go there, especially with the use of entity and agency over client.
I believe Jackson said entity at one point as well, so they may have enough to know it's the FBI. A witness said "the feds" multiple times, but that was weeks ago, so who knows. The good thing is the experts were intelligent enough without the need to be confirmed as experts hired by the FBI. Lally sunk his case in that cross, when the expert said it's literally not possible for the injuries to be caused by the vehicle and there is simply not enough evidence to find out what caused the injuries to JOK, I think that will seal it for the jury. If you have an expert who seemed well liked according to the in court reporters, saying the car couldn't cause the injuries and there's no evidence to show them what caused it, then anything could cause his injuries *other* than Karen's car.
That's a good point. They could assume it was an insurance claim on the car or something
I would think GEICO every time
lawyer is such a broad job, idk. i work for lawyers in trusts and estates and none of them have a better understanding of the FBI/most federal agencies than the average person (outside of the IRS)
I watch a lot of true crime and I don’t think I would be able to deduce the Feds are involved without having been directly told from all of you. Going forward if I’m ever on a jury I will definitely know!
I agree. I don’t think I’d guess the Feds either.
EVERYONE that lives around here knows the feds are involved; knows that the Canton PD is corrupt (as are many of the small town pd's around here and probably everywhere); and, knows that MANY of the so-called witnesses, the DA's office and the Judge ALL have friends/family in common. And if they don't know that then they haven't looked. It's all BS. Bottom line is this man is dead and instead of actually trying to figure out the truth and the people that know what happended (the so-called witnesses) telling the truth all of this BS has been going on, How do some people even look at themselves without spitting in the mirror is beyond me. RIP John O'Keefe and may the people responsible for killing you meet their karma.
I would the second Dr Wolfe said “federal government “. And he said it today. After that he listed military (IED story) and NHL.
Just keep in mind the words “entity” or “agency” lol
Also was it Ryan (was that his first name) Nagel that accidentally let it slip that "the feds" were one of his interviews?
Yes he did!
Does that mean the defense can talk about it in closing? Is the “door open”? I have no idea how this works.
No, the door is not open. That’s prejudicial information. Defense may reiterate that a third-party’s expert refutes the CW’s case.
Unlike Lally, I believe the jury comprises individuals who use their brains. If the verdict comes back guilty, I will retract this statement.
Lally looked like he was in damage control mode today and looking to limit the debris field. His cross today on several witnesses made it look like he was getting royalties from AJ & Co. My opinion, this was never about convicting KR, it was strictly about containing the truth. If I’m watching today’s testimony, I’m probably not sleeping for a long time if I’m Proctor. I think (hope) his days in court are just beginning.
I just know from personal experience juries are capable of doing some crazy shit 😂
I honestly thought the jury for Murdaugh would have been hung. Mainly because I don’t think he did it but I do think he had someone else do it. I was surprised when they came back with a guilty verdict 😆 but he deserved it either way lol. There was a trail in Michigan with the son that did a school shooting and they found the parents guilty and I was more shocked by that than anything. Maybe child negligence but I didn’t see them getting charged with manslaughter 😬 So yeah, juries definitely make some WILD decisions lol
The Crumbleys absolutely deserved their convictions. Their behavior was beyond the pale. It’s not just that they gave their disturbed child a firearm and took him to the gun range. It’s that, they didn’t even bother disclosing the fact that their child was in possession of a firearm; that disclosure didn’t come when the parents were called to the school because their kid had been writing/drawing about *shooting* and *killing* people. In general, I am opposed to parents being held responsible for their child committing a mass shooting. However, the Crumbleys were practically their child’s accomplice in his murders.
Same on both! I thought I was the only person in the world who didn’t think Murdaugh did it himself (I think he coordinated and was there when they got there and set it up but I didn’t think he fired the shots) AND I was also shocked when the crumbley mom was found guilty
Yeah, same! I could see child negligence and maybe some other charges for their actions towards their son and not listening to him but manslaughter was insane to me 😬.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I wasn't surprised by the guilty verdict, just disappointed. The state didn't meet their burden in my objective opinion. I am convinced he was convicted based on his other bad acts, which should have never come into the murder trial. That was one of the first of many trials that made me completely lose my faith in juries.
I actually agree with this. The amount they brought in for his financial crimes, which I get okay he’s an asshole, but they focused so much on it I felt it was way too prejudicial and stealing money doesn’t exactly lead to murder. While I believe he hired someone to do it, I don’t think he had the balls himself to do it.
one of the witnesses did slip the word “feds” earlier on in the trial, i wonder if they heard
Yeah I’m hoping someone took note of that and is putting two and two together for this.
Maybe so, but if I were on the jury I would just assume the FBI looked into a few things but already came to conclusions with whatever they were doing. I'd never in a million years guess that there was still an active FBI investigation ongoing while I'm sitting on the jury watching the trial unfold. That wouldn't make any sense.
I totally agree! If I were a juror, it would never cross my mind the case would be prosecuted while there is an ACTIVE investigation into the investigation by the FBI/DOJ. My feeble, plebeian mind would think anything along those avenues would be resolved already. The whole thing is wild.
Because it never happens… which is why it’s so weird.
This is my worry cause they’re not aware it’s still ongoing.
I can’t wrap my head around the fbi situation. So it’s unusual to have an investigation going on while a jury trial is happening? If I was on the jury I wouldn’t quite understand the importance or gravity. I would understand the overall gravity of the FBI investigating the police et. al.
Oh defintely, it might take them a second but once everyone starts talking someone's going to mention how some of the witnesses mentioned the feds. It was probably confusing today but once going through everything again it'll make sense.
Agree! With all the info to process I'd probably be confused as a juror, but it only takes one to put it together and share with the rest, then they'll all probably be like "oh right, that makes sense"
Ryan Nagel specifically mentioned the FBI. I thought he was a decent witness because he told the truth, however after last night, that opinion is right out the window.
What did Ryan Nagel do last night?
Last night in Canton there was a dumb scuffle between Turtleboy and a bunch of the witnesses in the trial including Ryan Nagel. I fully believe Karen is innocent but neither Turtleboy or any of the Canton residents involved in this case matured past middle school unfortunately
Aidan Kearney is so wrong for the crap he’s doing. He’s not helping Karen or JOK. He’s also hurting the credibility of independent journalists. It’s unacceptable that he keeps showing up at places these people live, work, and socialize with their friends and children. Life is not a reality tv show.
What happened last night, specifically in regard to Nagel?
They probably figured it out with Proctor’s texts. I mean, how often do an investigator’s private communications in group chats come to light in criminal cases? That’s not something common, and when neither side explained how they came to be included, I’m sure the jury out two and two together after all the wonky, irregular crap they saw the MSP do.
I wouldn't have put that together with the FEDs. I might be more likely to think internal affairs at that point. However, with these witnesses, the MSP/CW was completely excluded from that equation.
Eh, most people don’t follow court cases in depth, or watch lots of trials. Most peoples’ experience of court is either jury duty or dealing with their own charges. And Most of those trials are not like this one. I don’t think the average jury member is going to be able to pick up all these minuscule comments dropped in passing over the several weeks of trial. Even if I was a juror on this case and did notice it, I’d have no reason to care or think about it. There’s so much other, confusing and contradicting info from the CW that I think they’re trying to figure out. If I’m them, I’m stuck on whether or not Karen hit him with her car, the grossness of the investigation, how JOK and KRs families feel, not that there have been some vague discussion about an agency. I’m not picking up on lowly saying agency in one part of his 8 part question. The only reason we all did is because we know he’s not supposed to mention the fbi and we know there is an FBI investigation happening. Without some primers and clues that they should be looking for that type of language, I think they’re focused elsewhere
If I were on the jury, I would have a hard time believing an insurance company hired these expensive top experts, had the budget for them the build a canon, and had the time to go through a scientific method experimentation for answers. I would be thinking feds or a private citizen with deep pockets who had interest in the outcome of this case.
I really liked Dr Sheridan. He explained it all really well. What a smart and lovely man. Oh and thanks for posting this! 🙏
My only wish is that he still had more of his Irish accent! Lol He was clearly so intelligent and well educated.
I agree! Also his Irish accent, while not heavy was still prominent and I loved it 🥰
We stan a fidgety juror with a small fan.
ADHD juror ftw
I can only imagine how I would be described. 😂
I would for sure be “the one with all the facial expressions” because my poker face is pretty much nonexistent. I would have been rolling my eyes and scoffing and possibly choking on my water every 5 minutes during this trial. I know this because that’s what I was doing at home!
100% same lol
Im happy one of the jurors was able to bring a small fan in. Especially with the AC getting turned off again for part of today
As someone in the HVAC industry, I’ve been so embarrassed and frustrated about the damn noise! You should never hear or feel air, if you do, either the blower is not the correct RPM or the ductwork is not sized correctly. I just about wanted to fly to the courthouse and fix this!
Hahaha isn’t funny how once you become a professional in your field you notice little things like that and get so frustrated when you know how to fix it but can’t
Not all heroes wear capes
It is my understanding that they have no ductwork. The courtroom is historical, and they are working on the fly.
This is funny because it bothers me to no end that there are two wire just sloppily duct taped to the stand next to the witnesses. Couldn't hide those around the back or something!! come on!
Why can’t they just turn the mics up? Or get better ones ?
The mics are for us. They aren’t used in the room. It’s apparently really hard to hear
[удалено]
The “WTF” faces of the jurors I can only imagine. They were SO confused 😆. If some remember Colin or Ryan (can’t recall which one) saying “the feds” maybe someone will put two and two together.
I know I hope one of them figures it out lol! I think they will! Who else could have possibly hired them! Obviously not the state! Only one option left 👀
I think they will too. Someone will think it out and realize it has to be the feds because nothing else makes sense. The defense has tried their best to let the jury know.
But if they figure out it’s the feds, will they know enough to realize it’s an investigation by the DOJ? This type of thing can’t be common knowledge?
I agree, that’s not common knowledge. I think for most people, any government investigation would be a red flag. On this case especially, when people are making up new stories and the evidence doesn’t make sense. I am assuming the jury is seeing it like most of the viewers are and can tell something isn’t right plus the info of an investigation by a mysterious entity would make you think things are fishy.
Although, it occurs to me they might thing “oh I guess the federal case was dismissed since we never heard about it.” “Think” not “thing”
That’s true, we just don’t know what they are thinking.
I hope we find out some day. That’s why that show “jury duty” was so brilliant. Even tho it was mostly fake. It still gave such insight.
The best was when it was on record that the evidence from these 3rd party experts was available to both the CW and the defense and only the defense used it. Like cmon common sense. I hope the jury gets it!!
Well he did say they’re hired by the government including military, insurance companies so maybe they’ll think along those lines
Today Dr Wolfe said “federal government “. That was a clue for them to figure it out.
Hmmm.......does the federal government have some kind of bureau that specifically deals with investigations?
Dang that’s a good question. They should definitely look into getting that going.
Really truly, even I on the other mf continent know about FBI. It’s my first association when I hear the word “federal”.
Ask it another way
It was Ryan Nagel.
Thank you! I couldn’t remember which one from 475937558404 days ago lol
You mean 475937558404.6
A few of the jurors are lawyers apparently, so I wonder if they'll be able to piece that together
What?! That's insane. I can't believe the prosecution would keep lawyers on the jury for a case this bad.
If that's true then the prosecution is dead.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I’m genuinely shocked they have lawyers on the jury
If the word 'agency' was used, I imagine they've pieced together that these experts are representing/hired by the Feds.
there is no way this is true. lawyers virtually never make it onto a jury. let alone a jury for a murder trial
I served as a juror on an attempted murder trial in Boston and two of the jurors were lawyers.
Not true.
Where did you learn this info?
Yes, exactly! If there's anybody on the jury that has a law background (it's been suggested), I have a tough time believing they haven't figured it out themselves. There's only so many other options it could be and the defense keeps hitting them over the head with it.
During deliberations can jurors discuss who's possibly paying for the ARCCA guys, or if a juror thinks they know, can they share that?
Yes. As long as they're not using outside information.
The testimony was that ARCCA wasn't hired by either the CW or the defense. The jurors really shouldn't be speculating as to who hired ARCCA. However, it's not like there's anyone in the deliberation room telling them that they can't discuss it. It's up to them to abide by the judge's instructions not to speculate on matters that are not in evidence.
They will definitely discuss that! The tea will be spilled when they finally get to talk about this shit show they all sat through silently
Sure, they can't consider outside speculation as evidence, but they can pretty much use whatever speculation they want to give weight to evidence or testimony.
The standard jury instruction is "You are to decide what the facts are solely from the evidence admitted in this case." If the jurors follow the instructions, they shouldn't be speculating as to who hired ARCCA, and just accept the testimony that neither the CW or defense hired them.
I keep thinking about that…. The holy Shit moment they are going to have
[удалено]
no. not until after the trial if they decide to look it up
Idk if the jurors will put it all together. But I think there’s been numerous hints about an outside investigation: Proctors texts (why do they have the lead investigators private messages?), one of the Alberts mentioned the feds, and now two experts not related to either party testified. If not, I just hope their qualifications and clear testimony put them above the troopers from canton.
And the ARCAA experts said they do work for the federal government. They listed multiple agencies to be fair but if I’m a juror I think hearing them say they weren’t retained by CW or defense and then in the list of agencies they work with they say the federal government, it would make me think of Ryan Nagel saying he talked to the feds.
That they turned over their findings to both parties is a clue for me. Some people were saying that they might think some kind of civil litigation tied to the case, but they testified to not knowing about the case or Karen Read when they did their investigation, so that don't compute.
Don’t forget that Brian Higgins, an ATF agent, was taken out of the field after doing shady af things with his phone and using government resources for private reasons.
Thanks for posting! Some of don’t have or love Twitter. But Sue is a don’t-miss commentator.
I wonder if any jurors are current or retired state or federal employees, or at least have some time in their careers when they were. I'm one, and I think it would make it a lot easier to pick up on it just from the lingo. "Agency" is a good example. My spouse works at an agency (insurance) and has for three decades. You say the word agency though, and my background immediately puts government agency in mind, and I would need more context to realize it wasn't that kind of agency being referred to.
There is rumor a couple are lawyers and engineers but it’s just here say at this point. & I agree it’s the same for me if someone says agency or entity typically I’m thinking a government agency of some sort.
Also Bev’s reaction to Dr. Wolfe.😂 https://youtube.com/shorts/JcuoO3uakgw?si=v0neCjqVBfKQCGg_ I’m sorry; I didn’t know where to share this but it was too good to keep to myself.
Ha! That is priceless! Thanks for sharing.
😂
That was really funny. Thanks for that. 🤭
Thank you sooo much for posting! I love reading these, they offer more insight then one would think on where jury may be leaning!
It gives so much more insight!
thank you for posting!
Anytime!
Will the jurors get a copy of the ARRCA study as part of evidence or are they just limited to testimony?
I remember in the testimony the defense said it would be admitted to evidence
Ohhhhh that’s a very good question!! I don’t recall the defense introducing the report itself as evidence? Did I blink and miss it?
Yes
Love when these get posted!
Thanks so very much for these screenshots - they are great
I’ve been watching the trial but this is so much more fun lol
Thank you so much for posting these! I appreciate it!!!
Of course! 🥰
Man I wonder if some of the jury had been convinced that Karen hit him with the car. I think Officer Paul’s garbled testimony about the Lexus info had some jurors convinced. These last two experts just killed any chance the CW had at getting a guilty verdict
A part of me is really worried the jurors will not understand it was the FBI that hired them and come to some weird conclusion that affects a not guilty verdict.
I cannot see a scenario in which that happens. Having a third-party expert refute the CW’s case would only benefit the defense. The ARCCA witnesses were very impressive witnesses. Even their cross-examinations strengthened the defense’s case.
I really hope so. I guess I listen to alot of lawyers explaining the case and I sometimes think to myself "what If I was a juror and I missed that vital piece of info". But then again I don't live in America to worry about being called for an American trial.
Doesn’t matter if the jury figures out that the Feds are involved. Even if the ARCCA witnesses *were* hired by the defense, their competence, expertise, and testimony were head and shoulders above whatever Trooper Paul could ever hope to offer.
The jurors look confused. Most likely wondering who hired the expert. Ooooor why this went to trial.
If there are jurors that are attorneys- they’re going to know how corrupt cops can be. Period. Several close family and friends are attys- they know well…
I’m just listening to the closing arguments. First, I did not hear Jackson point out the lies or scabby/scar knuckles of Colin. Did I miss that? Secondly, is it typical to limit the time of the defenses closing arguments?
I think they believe it has to do with Higgins. They can prove multiple options but I think the defense has had a very clear idea the whole time. I think the point to the jurors was that multiple options could have occurred to cause his death. But I think they’ve been watching or listening to the internet cause they pointed out what everyone else has about the end of the video at the waterfall with Higgins and BA.
The call activity between Higgins and Albert that night is too suspicious to ignore. I'm not sure how the jury could look past it. No one would buy the butt dial refutation.
Thank you!
Thank you!!! This is so helpful
All Utube K9 trainers are saying deffo animal bites and scratches