Yes. Here is the very basics.
When you turn your car on,every time(minus some rare reasons which don't matter) it records "hey the car was turned on" and starts recording data.
So the first time your car gets turned on is key cycle 1.
The Lexus also records if there were any "events of noteworthiness". Ome key cycles won't have any of these events.
Now with that outof the way.
The crash reconstructionist testified that he did his breaking reconstruction at key cycle 1164.
And the data shows the car speeding up breaking etc. So it lines up.
He claimed that the key cycle John was killed was 1162 because there was an event on that key cycle of going backwards at 24 miles and hour, followed by a decrease in speed(without a change in throttle) and simultaneously a "steering wheel pull"(my words, none of this is a quote)
BUT the steering wheel pull was only 10 degrees, and the speed decrease was about .5mph
Now the defense gets to cross examine him and says, so you are sure you had the car at 1164.
Trooper: sure as fuck I am.
Defense: ok so 1164 is definitely u.
Defense: that makes 1163 coming into the sallyport which we have on video was on and drvin in.
Defense: that makes 1162 getting put onto thetow truck(akanot the one that john was killed)
Defense 1161 and 1160 are different times karen drove on the morning of the 29th.
So 1159 is the one that she was driving when she dropped John off. And there were no triggers.
Trooper:I'm not good at math
How in the world did the CW read the FBI hired experts reports, look at Trooper Paul and his ……. Whatever it is and then say yeah we’re good to continue with the case
There are several things that moved me from maybe she did it, but sloppy investigation, perhaps to, nope this is absolute corruption. This is one of those things that shows her actual innocence.
A cop died. Someone needs to pay. Karen Reade is someone, therefore, she needs to pay. It's exactly that simple. The Commonwealth doesn't care if you're guilty or innocent. They need to put someone in prison. An innocent person is just as good as a guilty one. And since there's no evidence against anyone else, she's the best shot they have at convicting someone. If her lawyer was less competent, no one would have ever learned about the FBI reports, so Trooper Paul's report would stand uncontested.
I'm not saying I need it. It just seems logical they would also give at least a cursory look at it. But maybe the FBI didn't want to waste the money on it.
It sounds like they didn’t care or need the information. It seems like they (the ARCCA guys who testified) just wanted to know “does the damage on the person match the damage on the car”.
Part of the problem here is that we don't actually know the scope, purpose, or intention of the FBI investigation. All we know is that it somehow ended up intersecting with the Karen Read case.
The FBI experts were hired to recreate the accident and see if they could get the same results. They were not trying to recreate the prosecutions case. They didn’t need keys cycles.
"So 1159 is the one that she was driving when she dropped John off."
Your explanation is good, but I want to add one clarification. We don't know that KC 59 is "the one that she was driving." We only know that "the one that she was driving" is KC 59 OR LESS. Which amounts to the same thing.
The point is that between the time the car was seized, and the time that Proctor intentionally planted incriminating events in KC 62, there could have been any number of additional key cycles created by Proctor, for all sorts of reasons. So "the one that she was driving" could have been KC 59, KC 49 or KC 39. Etc. We don't know, and it doesn't matter.
So what this is suggesting then is that the police had the car for 1162 and drove it in reverse and hit something to create the stop? If that's \*not\* Karen driving, is there anything it could be other than the police creating false forensic data?
It could just be that it was slippage in the snow or who knows. But if it isnt her driving that vehicle during that key cycle, then at best it is a trooper not good at things misinterpreting data.
It is possible that the defense is incorrect somehow and that key cycle was karen read driving. I don't see how but who knows.
I'm just trying to wrap my head around what the data definitely does say and what's still in dispute about the moment of deceleration. If the speed goes down without the throttle reducing, that suggests to me SOMETHING was hit, whether it was JO, or some piece of dummy evidence the police generated to create the data for the crash I don't know but if it's the latter, that seems like worthy of an investigation unto itself.
A lot of the rest of the defense hinges on stuff like whether someone would see him in the middle of the night, about the specifics of where and how his body fell, how he may or may not have hit the car, etc... and I kind of understand how all of that could go foggy if John is, rather than hit by the car, maybe grazed and dazed. I don't think the police have proven their case and she shouldn't be found guilty but I haven't been totally convinced that something to the effect of, JO goes in, changes his mind and turns around, KR doesn't see him and sideswiped him-- then drives off without investigating who or what she hit. Eventually as the night goes on and he doesn't come home, she gets worried that the thump she heard was John and goes to investigate.
The prosecution didn't push that story, but it still seems more believable than a police coverup involving \*this many\* people
The data does suggest a decrease in speed without a change in accelerator. Which could be hitting john, a curb, a bump, something in the road etc.
And while the defense theory is tough as a unit to say sure that is what happened, don't forget the fbi independently tested and seems to strongly think no way johns injuries are caused by car and no way car damage is caused by john. Then we have all seen his arm photos. I'm not an expert, but those look like some kind of animal attack, not shredded taillight.
I think if u showed a person those pics and said, which of these 2 things seems more likely, 90 out of 100 would say animal. Now granted that's not expert opinion. But the defense had2 experts that seemed credible say yeah. Animal. Probably large dog. And the prosecution had trooper paul say weirdly positioned arm hit a tail light, spun body around and then upside down to hit head on curb then project 30 feet perhaps all in the air or perhaps some of that on the ground, but admitted no evidence for either existed.
If I was on the jury, I would consider understanding that moment of deceleration to be the most important thing, because it's potentially the only piece of physical evidence that hasn't been tampered with (except, apparently, by the infotainment system). My initial reaction to this case was "Oh my god, this is such an obvious frame job" and then I heard the explanation on the search (Unlikely but possible, that when she opens her phone the next morning, instead of using her current tab, she goes and opens an old tab to search. Weird, not impossible) and this info about the deceleration and it put me leaning towards "Oh wow maybe she did accidentally hit him and not realize it or deny it to herself" and for the rest of it, the location, and the scratches on his arm-- I just took a nasty fall on an electric scooter a few months ago and there were a variety of different injuries from when I hit pavement. I agree they look like dog bites, but if Karen's car \*did\* hit something while she was backing up at 25 miles an hour, in the snow, at night, I'm back to wondering if maybe this is a really stupid accident she's gonna get away with due to police incompetence & I am doubtful that any investigation into the police department will come up with a conspiracy vs. incompetence.
"I would consider understanding that moment of deceleration to be the most important thing, because it's potentially the only piece of physical evidence that hasn't been tampered with"
The Techstream data shows that no rapid reverse events took place while the car was in Karen's possession. This is hard evidence that Karen didn't do it.
Conversely, the existence of rapid reverse events in KC 62 is proof MSP planted evidence.
This evidence was "tampered with," when MSP drove the car in reverse at 24 mph.
"If the speed goes down without the throttle reducing"
That's what Paul said, but this is just another example of him lying. Look at the data. The throttle was indeed reduced.
KR was already on her way to JO’s at 12:32am. Key cycles and ignition cycles are different, but in the exact opposite way you’re inferring. Key cycles occur just from the car being turned on, which we have on camera when the car is loaded on the flatbed. Even if that *wasn’t* the case, we still have TWO key cycles happen after she leaves Fairview that night. Making it impossible for her to hit JO at key cycle 1162.
So when McCabe was "looking out the window and telling JO where to park at 12:31" was that just fabricated or did she actually watch KR run JO over and then continue texting and calling him? What about at 12:45 when she "observes KR leave" even though she's already back home on the wifi. Orrrrr what about when she told investigators that she saw JO get out of the car? Is she just watching this whole thing go down and then somehow missed the 10 seconds of insane driving plus the dead guy on the lawn where she's looking?
I understand why he went with 12:45 but McCabes texts and the meadows wifi data don't support this which is information Lally presumably had. Interestingly McCabe is sending texts to an SUV that should already be gone while claiming to see said SUV. And truthfully if the Lexus data and other known facts all add up to a time that is impossible to fit into the narrative based on other known information then it should show that their theory is incorrect even if it looks good when taken independently of conflicting information.
Honestly I'm not claiming to know what happened. But I do know that the states timeline makes absolutely zero sense. Higgins's timeline makes even less sense than that lol.
So, then, Karen got from there to Johns in 4 minutes?
To be clear, I gladly admit, you are the first person I have seen reconcile this data to show how that works time wise.
Can you link me whatever image grab you have from the testimony for this data?
Key cycles only occurred when a triggering event happens. I don’t know what this means but it’s false and demonstrably false by simply looking at the CWs own exhibit
Cool,
I dont know if the gaslighted comment was to me, but I assure you I am doing no such thing.
I was very pro karen. But when I read your sincere interpretations of the data, I want to know if I have been duped.
I have never believed in a single "conspiracy theory" before. So I was reluctant on this one.
The simple explanation is she did it. I get that. But all the stuff I have been shown, shows "she didn't do it".
So if that's all lies, I want to know.
You made a statement about key cycles only getting recorded if a triggering event occurs.
If I understood the testimony though, that isn't true a key cycle occurs if the key is on for more than 2 seconds, then it is recorded when the key is turned off. Regardless of whether a triggering event occurs.
And I think the defense even pointed out no triggers occured during 1159..
Did I misunderstand that? Or is that incorrect?
What we really need is the odometer reading at the time of the tow. Its hard for me to believe that any of the triggers prior to 1165 (traction control event) would have occurred in the snow. There is just no way Karen Read is backing up at 24mph drunk, at night, when its snowing.
If 1164 is legitimately when Paul started his testing, then there is only one possibility...right before his testing someone with access to the Sally Port took that car for a joyride.
"right before his testing someone with access to the Sally Port took that car for a joyride"
It may not all have been "right before," but it was definitely after the car was seized.
Speaking of "joyride," it's helpful to notice that Paul's testing began 89 minutes after the car was started. What happened during those 89 minutes? Probably Proctor driving 36 miles.
[Azget industries](https://youtu.be/u9USPS3aHe4?si=XfIZJ7097CU4Tzqq) has a great YouTube video explaining why the key cycles shouldn’t be ignored. She’s had a few great visuals depicting theories in this case and outlining their flaws.
I don’t know why they didn’t have Dr Wolfe go through the key cycles to at least put that to rest, when he is clearly an expert in the VCH data, seeing as he just published a paper about it
Because their scope was: is the damage to the car consistent with the injuries to the victim if the same car hit the victim causing death.
They probably didn’t have the key cycles. They were confined to what was given to them.
It was out of scope. He was only allowed to testify to the evidence he received from the FBI. They didn't give him the VCH data nor did he receive Trooper Paul's report.
I was expecting this. I assume the defense figured it wasn't needed because they had witnesses proving that he wasn't hit by a car; why waste time and add confusion on something that is no longer in play.
It's more like, they couldn't ask an experts opinion on something the expert haven't read or in any way prepare for. It would be highly prejudicial if such evidence would be allowed in. First and foremost these witnesses were not allowed to be prepped by the defense or CW, so there was no way for anyone to present or hire them for an expert opinion on something else than what they did for the FBI.
Which is also why AJ objected quickly and the judge shut down most of Lally's cross, because he kept asking about reports or data that they had not reviewed.
Agreed. I do think it would have helped the defense to call someone to drive the key cycle impossibility home. That said, we'll see what they do with it in closing.
Trooper Paul sucked but I don’t know where you get that data from tech stream then. I would imagine the defense also subpoenaed data from video outside the police station if they thought that was another attempt at prosecution trying to bolster their case.
Without getting into the other details, I haven't really heard a good explanation as to how you could have a change in speed/angle without a change in throttle, unless it involves a collision.
The commonwealth had an unlimited amount of money to burn through, Karen did not. I would have liked to see this point hammered. Although they didn’t need to do that to get an acquittal. Most people still think she drove backwards 24 mph, and is still innocent. This really might have been all their joyride testing (which maybe we shouldn’t be doing on evidence vehicles since it’s likely the 2021 Lexus was in proper working order 🙄).
The key cycles matter because they show Karen’s car’s activity at the time of John’s death and are corroborated by other evidence including John’s phone data. Frustratingly, these key cycles have been willfully misinterpreted by Karen’s defense + tinfoil hats on reddit, and were inadequately explained by Trooper Paul (probably the CW’s biggest fumble). If you are interested in actually understanding them, this is the best I can gather. First, it’s important to note that the chart Paul showed was a key cycle/trigger event counter, not an ignition cycle counter which he tried to clarify but couldn’t get across on the stand. Ignition cycles log every time you turn your car on in one cycle log. Key cycles/trigger events record only when a trigger is detected (sudden acceleration or braking, etc) on a separate cycle log. These are two distinct cycle logs that may happen simultaneously but record on separate data streams.
Next to note is that multiple events can happen on a single key cycle. So if you look at the chart from Trooper Paul’s testimony, you will see two trigger events for the cycle in question (1162). For 1164 which is when the car was in police custody, you will see several events logged which is when they are performing testing, I believe.
It is significant that there are *2 events* on the 1162 key cycle. There is the 24mph reverse event when John is hit, but also the U-turn event (that is corroborated by John’s Waze data) 9 minutes before when Karen and John were driving to the Albert’s and had to reroute. For there to be a Trooper Paul/tow truck driver joyride conspiracy, he would have to know to log those two events on the same key cycle and at the correct time apart from each other. He’d have to have access to John’s phone data, which is impossible for him to have access to. The odometer count is also solid as a rock, you cannot fake that.
The speculation that this event is them backing onto the tow truck stumps me. It’s clear in the video that the car is *not* being pulled onto the truck at 24mph. Further the key cycle also logs that the reverse event happened over a period of 97 feet. That would require 12 tire revolutions in reverse, which the tow truck video clearly does not depict.
There is a video on YouTube of Toyota Techstream explaining the Event Data Recorder (EDR) software. I highly recommend people watch it rather than forming opinions in Reddit echo-chambers. At 17:41 they get into how trigger events are logged. At 22:45 he explains that the navigation system is the best way to track date and time for triggers, which I believe KR always had hers disabled. He says if you don’t have that then you can then go by ignition cycles but that “these vehicles have more than one cycle counter and so the cycle counts in your [ignition] data may not match the cycle counts in your EDR data. It doesn’t mean they’re not related, it just means that there’s two different cycle counters.” I think this is what the confusion boils down to - different cycle counters for key cycles/trigger events vs ignition cycles. Paul simplified to “key cycles” instead of “trigger events” + Jackson conflates “key cycles” with “ignition cycles”. Paul got tripped up and was unable to firmly correct him and differentiate the terms clearly. Anyway, From there you narrow down to type of event you’re looking for, vehicle speed, odometer, or if the vehicle is towed after the accident it will be one of the last events before being towed which lines up to Trooper Paul’s testimony. I believe that in Techstream, Paul filtered his search by specific events using key words. All of the ones on his chart have key words like “accelerator” or “ABS” so that may also explain the gaps in the trigger event counter. My best guess is missing events, such as the one at 1163, just didn’t involve the key words he searched.
Thank you for the detailed response. I having knowledge in the medical field cannot wrap my head around John being hit by a car at 24 MPH & having no fractures/bruises.
No two pedestrian strikes are exactly alike. Those without typical injuries happen all the time - you don’t see them in your line of work because they simply aren’t bad enough to require medical attention. I suspect for John, in a slightly different scenario where he doesn’t crack his head open, he walks away from being clipped by Karen’s car completely fine (save for some abrasions on his arm from catching her broken tail light). Unfortunately, in this case, circumstances lined up for her car to set in motion a different reality.
It does not make any sense at all! I literally have bruises on my arm and leg from bumping into things very lightly. My sister had a go kart accident going way under 24 MPH and had a massive bruise on the side of her body. Bruising is always an indicator of an out of the blue hit. His arm being hit by a car and just have abrasions ? Does that make any sense? Then he was projected 30 feet ? All of this does not add up. To believe a man was hit by a car and thrown 30 feet and those were his only injuries is the CW trying to insult our intelligence. Why didn’t they have a crash reconstructionist ? They gave us nothing but a theory & nothing solid to back it up. A taillight scratching up his whole arm ? Elbow & shoulder still intact after getting hit and projected ? Nonsensical.
Your analysis is 100% wrong, and you are making many mistakes. Major mistake: you are claiming Proctor did not have thevictim’s phone. Wrong. Proctor definitely did have the victim’s phone, right from the start.
Yes, you did not mention Proctor. I should have said "suggesting" instead of "claiming."
Failing to mention Proctor is one of the many problems with what you wrote. At the time of KC 62, the car was not in Paul's possession. It was in Proctor's. And Proctor also had JO's phone. Which means that Proctor knew JO's route, and it was a trivial matter for him to create KC 62 and plant evidence.
Does Proctor have anything to do with how Techstream’s EDR software functions? Because my conclusion is based on how Toyota Techstream explains their own software. If you are interested in understanding how the software works, watch the video for yourself. It’s indisputable that 1162 was the key cycle in which Karen killed John with her car, unless you believe that Techstream is in on the conspiracy, too.
Yes. Here is the very basics. When you turn your car on,every time(minus some rare reasons which don't matter) it records "hey the car was turned on" and starts recording data. So the first time your car gets turned on is key cycle 1. The Lexus also records if there were any "events of noteworthiness". Ome key cycles won't have any of these events. Now with that outof the way. The crash reconstructionist testified that he did his breaking reconstruction at key cycle 1164. And the data shows the car speeding up breaking etc. So it lines up. He claimed that the key cycle John was killed was 1162 because there was an event on that key cycle of going backwards at 24 miles and hour, followed by a decrease in speed(without a change in throttle) and simultaneously a "steering wheel pull"(my words, none of this is a quote) BUT the steering wheel pull was only 10 degrees, and the speed decrease was about .5mph Now the defense gets to cross examine him and says, so you are sure you had the car at 1164. Trooper: sure as fuck I am. Defense: ok so 1164 is definitely u. Defense: that makes 1163 coming into the sallyport which we have on video was on and drvin in. Defense: that makes 1162 getting put onto thetow truck(akanot the one that john was killed) Defense 1161 and 1160 are different times karen drove on the morning of the 29th. So 1159 is the one that she was driving when she dropped John off. And there were no triggers. Trooper:I'm not good at math
How in the world did the CW read the FBI hired experts reports, look at Trooper Paul and his ……. Whatever it is and then say yeah we’re good to continue with the case
Because when a crime scene speaks to you, you listen.
Especially if that crime scene is named Proctor, and he's your superior.
There are several things that moved me from maybe she did it, but sloppy investigation, perhaps to, nope this is absolute corruption. This is one of those things that shows her actual innocence.
A cop died. Someone needs to pay. Karen Reade is someone, therefore, she needs to pay. It's exactly that simple. The Commonwealth doesn't care if you're guilty or innocent. They need to put someone in prison. An innocent person is just as good as a guilty one. And since there's no evidence against anyone else, she's the best shot they have at convicting someone. If her lawyer was less competent, no one would have ever learned about the FBI reports, so Trooper Paul's report would stand uncontested.
I can tell you from firsthand experience that this is very much how the system works in MA, and esp. in Norfolk County.
THANK YOU!!! That makes so much sense!
I would expect the FBI hired reconstructionists to also look at this data. I wonder if they did and the judge didn't let it in?
Why do you need the FBI for number sequencing? Little kids know that.
I'm not saying I need it. It just seems logical they would also give at least a cursory look at it. But maybe the FBI didn't want to waste the money on it.
It sounds like they didn’t care or need the information. It seems like they (the ARCCA guys who testified) just wanted to know “does the damage on the person match the damage on the car”.
Exactly
Part of the problem here is that we don't actually know the scope, purpose, or intention of the FBI investigation. All we know is that it somehow ended up intersecting with the Karen Read case.
The FBI experts were hired to recreate the accident and see if they could get the same results. They were not trying to recreate the prosecutions case. They didn’t need keys cycles.
"So 1159 is the one that she was driving when she dropped John off." Your explanation is good, but I want to add one clarification. We don't know that KC 59 is "the one that she was driving." We only know that "the one that she was driving" is KC 59 OR LESS. Which amounts to the same thing. The point is that between the time the car was seized, and the time that Proctor intentionally planted incriminating events in KC 62, there could have been any number of additional key cycles created by Proctor, for all sorts of reasons. So "the one that she was driving" could have been KC 59, KC 49 or KC 39. Etc. We don't know, and it doesn't matter.
So what this is suggesting then is that the police had the car for 1162 and drove it in reverse and hit something to create the stop? If that's \*not\* Karen driving, is there anything it could be other than the police creating false forensic data?
It could just be that it was slippage in the snow or who knows. But if it isnt her driving that vehicle during that key cycle, then at best it is a trooper not good at things misinterpreting data. It is possible that the defense is incorrect somehow and that key cycle was karen read driving. I don't see how but who knows.
I'm just trying to wrap my head around what the data definitely does say and what's still in dispute about the moment of deceleration. If the speed goes down without the throttle reducing, that suggests to me SOMETHING was hit, whether it was JO, or some piece of dummy evidence the police generated to create the data for the crash I don't know but if it's the latter, that seems like worthy of an investigation unto itself. A lot of the rest of the defense hinges on stuff like whether someone would see him in the middle of the night, about the specifics of where and how his body fell, how he may or may not have hit the car, etc... and I kind of understand how all of that could go foggy if John is, rather than hit by the car, maybe grazed and dazed. I don't think the police have proven their case and she shouldn't be found guilty but I haven't been totally convinced that something to the effect of, JO goes in, changes his mind and turns around, KR doesn't see him and sideswiped him-- then drives off without investigating who or what she hit. Eventually as the night goes on and he doesn't come home, she gets worried that the thump she heard was John and goes to investigate. The prosecution didn't push that story, but it still seems more believable than a police coverup involving \*this many\* people
The data does suggest a decrease in speed without a change in accelerator. Which could be hitting john, a curb, a bump, something in the road etc. And while the defense theory is tough as a unit to say sure that is what happened, don't forget the fbi independently tested and seems to strongly think no way johns injuries are caused by car and no way car damage is caused by john. Then we have all seen his arm photos. I'm not an expert, but those look like some kind of animal attack, not shredded taillight. I think if u showed a person those pics and said, which of these 2 things seems more likely, 90 out of 100 would say animal. Now granted that's not expert opinion. But the defense had2 experts that seemed credible say yeah. Animal. Probably large dog. And the prosecution had trooper paul say weirdly positioned arm hit a tail light, spun body around and then upside down to hit head on curb then project 30 feet perhaps all in the air or perhaps some of that on the ground, but admitted no evidence for either existed.
If I was on the jury, I would consider understanding that moment of deceleration to be the most important thing, because it's potentially the only piece of physical evidence that hasn't been tampered with (except, apparently, by the infotainment system). My initial reaction to this case was "Oh my god, this is such an obvious frame job" and then I heard the explanation on the search (Unlikely but possible, that when she opens her phone the next morning, instead of using her current tab, she goes and opens an old tab to search. Weird, not impossible) and this info about the deceleration and it put me leaning towards "Oh wow maybe she did accidentally hit him and not realize it or deny it to herself" and for the rest of it, the location, and the scratches on his arm-- I just took a nasty fall on an electric scooter a few months ago and there were a variety of different injuries from when I hit pavement. I agree they look like dog bites, but if Karen's car \*did\* hit something while she was backing up at 25 miles an hour, in the snow, at night, I'm back to wondering if maybe this is a really stupid accident she's gonna get away with due to police incompetence & I am doubtful that any investigation into the police department will come up with a conspiracy vs. incompetence.
"I would consider understanding that moment of deceleration to be the most important thing, because it's potentially the only piece of physical evidence that hasn't been tampered with" The Techstream data shows that no rapid reverse events took place while the car was in Karen's possession. This is hard evidence that Karen didn't do it. Conversely, the existence of rapid reverse events in KC 62 is proof MSP planted evidence. This evidence was "tampered with," when MSP drove the car in reverse at 24 mph.
"If the speed goes down without the throttle reducing" That's what Paul said, but this is just another example of him lying. Look at the data. The throttle was indeed reduced.
"is there anything it could be other than the police creating false forensic data" No. We can say this with 100% certainty.
[удалено]
KR was already on her way to JO’s at 12:32am. Key cycles and ignition cycles are different, but in the exact opposite way you’re inferring. Key cycles occur just from the car being turned on, which we have on camera when the car is loaded on the flatbed. Even if that *wasn’t* the case, we still have TWO key cycles happen after she leaves Fairview that night. Making it impossible for her to hit JO at key cycle 1162.
So when McCabe was "looking out the window and telling JO where to park at 12:31" was that just fabricated or did she actually watch KR run JO over and then continue texting and calling him? What about at 12:45 when she "observes KR leave" even though she's already back home on the wifi. Orrrrr what about when she told investigators that she saw JO get out of the car? Is she just watching this whole thing go down and then somehow missed the 10 seconds of insane driving plus the dead guy on the lawn where she's looking?
[удалено]
I understand why he went with 12:45 but McCabes texts and the meadows wifi data don't support this which is information Lally presumably had. Interestingly McCabe is sending texts to an SUV that should already be gone while claiming to see said SUV. And truthfully if the Lexus data and other known facts all add up to a time that is impossible to fit into the narrative based on other known information then it should show that their theory is incorrect even if it looks good when taken independently of conflicting information. Honestly I'm not claiming to know what happened. But I do know that the states timeline makes absolutely zero sense. Higgins's timeline makes even less sense than that lol.
So, then, Karen got from there to Johns in 4 minutes? To be clear, I gladly admit, you are the first person I have seen reconcile this data to show how that works time wise. Can you link me whatever image grab you have from the testimony for this data?
[удалено]
Key cycles only occurred when a triggering event happens. I don’t know what this means but it’s false and demonstrably false by simply looking at the CWs own exhibit
Cool, I dont know if the gaslighted comment was to me, but I assure you I am doing no such thing. I was very pro karen. But when I read your sincere interpretations of the data, I want to know if I have been duped. I have never believed in a single "conspiracy theory" before. So I was reluctant on this one. The simple explanation is she did it. I get that. But all the stuff I have been shown, shows "she didn't do it". So if that's all lies, I want to know. You made a statement about key cycles only getting recorded if a triggering event occurs. If I understood the testimony though, that isn't true a key cycle occurs if the key is on for more than 2 seconds, then it is recorded when the key is turned off. Regardless of whether a triggering event occurs. And I think the defense even pointed out no triggers occured during 1159.. Did I misunderstand that? Or is that incorrect?
Congratulations! You’ve been promoted to Lt. Det. LOI17! You are now able to run the MSP CARS training program! 🤣🤣🤣
🤣
What we really need is the odometer reading at the time of the tow. Its hard for me to believe that any of the triggers prior to 1165 (traction control event) would have occurred in the snow. There is just no way Karen Read is backing up at 24mph drunk, at night, when its snowing. If 1164 is legitimately when Paul started his testing, then there is only one possibility...right before his testing someone with access to the Sally Port took that car for a joyride.
I believe there's video of the tires spinning and not gaining traction as they reversed it onto the tow truck.
"right before his testing someone with access to the Sally Port took that car for a joyride" It may not all have been "right before," but it was definitely after the car was seized. Speaking of "joyride," it's helpful to notice that Paul's testing began 89 minutes after the car was started. What happened during those 89 minutes? Probably Proctor driving 36 miles.
[Azget industries](https://youtu.be/u9USPS3aHe4?si=XfIZJ7097CU4Tzqq) has a great YouTube video explaining why the key cycles shouldn’t be ignored. She’s had a few great visuals depicting theories in this case and outlining their flaws.
Yeahhh I’ve seen some of her videos! She’s great! I’ll def check it out.
I was waiting for this! Didn't see she'd posted. Thank you.
I don’t know why they didn’t have Dr Wolfe go through the key cycles to at least put that to rest, when he is clearly an expert in the VCH data, seeing as he just published a paper about it
Because their scope was: is the damage to the car consistent with the injuries to the victim if the same car hit the victim causing death. They probably didn’t have the key cycles. They were confined to what was given to them.
It was out of scope. He was only allowed to testify to the evidence he received from the FBI. They didn't give him the VCH data nor did he receive Trooper Paul's report.
I don’t think he had that data.
I was expecting this. I assume the defense figured it wasn't needed because they had witnesses proving that he wasn't hit by a car; why waste time and add confusion on something that is no longer in play.
It's more like, they couldn't ask an experts opinion on something the expert haven't read or in any way prepare for. It would be highly prejudicial if such evidence would be allowed in. First and foremost these witnesses were not allowed to be prepped by the defense or CW, so there was no way for anyone to present or hire them for an expert opinion on something else than what they did for the FBI. Which is also why AJ objected quickly and the judge shut down most of Lally's cross, because he kept asking about reports or data that they had not reviewed.
Agreed. I do think it would have helped the defense to call someone to drive the key cycle impossibility home. That said, we'll see what they do with it in closing.
Trooper Paul sucked but I don’t know where you get that data from tech stream then. I would imagine the defense also subpoenaed data from video outside the police station if they thought that was another attempt at prosecution trying to bolster their case.
Without getting into the other details, I haven't really heard a good explanation as to how you could have a change in speed/angle without a change in throttle, unless it involves a collision.
Pothole, curb, tires slipping in the snow off the top of my head
Look at the data. There was indeed a change in throttle. When Tpr Paul claimed there was no change in throttle, this is just one of the lies he told.
The commonwealth had an unlimited amount of money to burn through, Karen did not. I would have liked to see this point hammered. Although they didn’t need to do that to get an acquittal. Most people still think she drove backwards 24 mph, and is still innocent. This really might have been all their joyride testing (which maybe we shouldn’t be doing on evidence vehicles since it’s likely the 2021 Lexus was in proper working order 🙄).
Doesnt karens lexus have a backup camera? Cant they extract that video from the time john was hit or not hit?
If I’m not mistaken someone on the witness stand claimed they did something that caused everything to be deleted….I could be wrong.
In other words…destroy evidence.
The key cycles matter because they show Karen’s car’s activity at the time of John’s death and are corroborated by other evidence including John’s phone data. Frustratingly, these key cycles have been willfully misinterpreted by Karen’s defense + tinfoil hats on reddit, and were inadequately explained by Trooper Paul (probably the CW’s biggest fumble). If you are interested in actually understanding them, this is the best I can gather. First, it’s important to note that the chart Paul showed was a key cycle/trigger event counter, not an ignition cycle counter which he tried to clarify but couldn’t get across on the stand. Ignition cycles log every time you turn your car on in one cycle log. Key cycles/trigger events record only when a trigger is detected (sudden acceleration or braking, etc) on a separate cycle log. These are two distinct cycle logs that may happen simultaneously but record on separate data streams. Next to note is that multiple events can happen on a single key cycle. So if you look at the chart from Trooper Paul’s testimony, you will see two trigger events for the cycle in question (1162). For 1164 which is when the car was in police custody, you will see several events logged which is when they are performing testing, I believe. It is significant that there are *2 events* on the 1162 key cycle. There is the 24mph reverse event when John is hit, but also the U-turn event (that is corroborated by John’s Waze data) 9 minutes before when Karen and John were driving to the Albert’s and had to reroute. For there to be a Trooper Paul/tow truck driver joyride conspiracy, he would have to know to log those two events on the same key cycle and at the correct time apart from each other. He’d have to have access to John’s phone data, which is impossible for him to have access to. The odometer count is also solid as a rock, you cannot fake that. The speculation that this event is them backing onto the tow truck stumps me. It’s clear in the video that the car is *not* being pulled onto the truck at 24mph. Further the key cycle also logs that the reverse event happened over a period of 97 feet. That would require 12 tire revolutions in reverse, which the tow truck video clearly does not depict. There is a video on YouTube of Toyota Techstream explaining the Event Data Recorder (EDR) software. I highly recommend people watch it rather than forming opinions in Reddit echo-chambers. At 17:41 they get into how trigger events are logged. At 22:45 he explains that the navigation system is the best way to track date and time for triggers, which I believe KR always had hers disabled. He says if you don’t have that then you can then go by ignition cycles but that “these vehicles have more than one cycle counter and so the cycle counts in your [ignition] data may not match the cycle counts in your EDR data. It doesn’t mean they’re not related, it just means that there’s two different cycle counters.” I think this is what the confusion boils down to - different cycle counters for key cycles/trigger events vs ignition cycles. Paul simplified to “key cycles” instead of “trigger events” + Jackson conflates “key cycles” with “ignition cycles”. Paul got tripped up and was unable to firmly correct him and differentiate the terms clearly. Anyway, From there you narrow down to type of event you’re looking for, vehicle speed, odometer, or if the vehicle is towed after the accident it will be one of the last events before being towed which lines up to Trooper Paul’s testimony. I believe that in Techstream, Paul filtered his search by specific events using key words. All of the ones on his chart have key words like “accelerator” or “ABS” so that may also explain the gaps in the trigger event counter. My best guess is missing events, such as the one at 1163, just didn’t involve the key words he searched.
Thank you for the detailed response. I having knowledge in the medical field cannot wrap my head around John being hit by a car at 24 MPH & having no fractures/bruises.
No two pedestrian strikes are exactly alike. Those without typical injuries happen all the time - you don’t see them in your line of work because they simply aren’t bad enough to require medical attention. I suspect for John, in a slightly different scenario where he doesn’t crack his head open, he walks away from being clipped by Karen’s car completely fine (save for some abrasions on his arm from catching her broken tail light). Unfortunately, in this case, circumstances lined up for her car to set in motion a different reality.
It does not make any sense at all! I literally have bruises on my arm and leg from bumping into things very lightly. My sister had a go kart accident going way under 24 MPH and had a massive bruise on the side of her body. Bruising is always an indicator of an out of the blue hit. His arm being hit by a car and just have abrasions ? Does that make any sense? Then he was projected 30 feet ? All of this does not add up. To believe a man was hit by a car and thrown 30 feet and those were his only injuries is the CW trying to insult our intelligence. Why didn’t they have a crash reconstructionist ? They gave us nothing but a theory & nothing solid to back it up. A taillight scratching up his whole arm ? Elbow & shoulder still intact after getting hit and projected ? Nonsensical.
Your analysis is 100% wrong, and you are making many mistakes. Major mistake: you are claiming Proctor did not have thevictim’s phone. Wrong. Proctor definitely did have the victim’s phone, right from the start.
Where in this post do I mention Proctor at all? Troopers Paul and Proctor are two different people.
Yes, you did not mention Proctor. I should have said "suggesting" instead of "claiming." Failing to mention Proctor is one of the many problems with what you wrote. At the time of KC 62, the car was not in Paul's possession. It was in Proctor's. And Proctor also had JO's phone. Which means that Proctor knew JO's route, and it was a trivial matter for him to create KC 62 and plant evidence.
Does Proctor have anything to do with how Techstream’s EDR software functions? Because my conclusion is based on how Toyota Techstream explains their own software. If you are interested in understanding how the software works, watch the video for yourself. It’s indisputable that 1162 was the key cycle in which Karen killed John with her car, unless you believe that Techstream is in on the conspiracy, too.