I am sad that we will not know what happened to John. Any evidence that could've been found in the house, on the dogs claws, anywhere in the area, in the Ford edge etc is long gone now. So f*cking sad. If only they had done their job and investigated like they should have and with the potential culprit being innocent until proven guilty.
Even the illedged third party culprits should be upset with the investigators for not looking into them at all. If these officers asked Brian Albert if they could take a take a quick look around the house. If the prosecution asked to look at any of these people's phones just to look at briefly then at least they would have the appearance that they didn't have tunnel vision. If Canton PD would have attempted to secure the crime scene by leaving an officer to monitor to be sure no one tampered with the crime scene the it would be much easier to believe that it was not compromised. If the evidence was properly documented and a log sheet existed then people would not be skeptical of the chain of custody. It they had taken photos of the taillight damage before transferring it to their custody, it would be much more convincing that the taillight was completely shattered before law inforcement had access to it. If witness interviews were done in a timely manner and promptly memorialized in affidavits signed by the witnesses, then it would be much more believable that people weren't changing their account after the fact. The list goes on an on.
It is absolutely heartbreaking that no one will truly know what happened to John that night, regardless of the outcome and verdict. It breaks my heart for the family to be so consumed and put all their faith into the Common Weath.. just to be let down, in my opinion.
I think JM family have a pretty good idea of what could have happened and I think they are pretty sure that it wasn’t KR but they didn’t like her to start with and in the beginning they may have thought she had something to do with it but after sitting through the trial they had to know she wasn’t responsible for his death. They definitely have to have many questions after the defense had there defense of how many 3 and they weren’t hired by the defense , they were from the FBI’s investigation. This man wasn’t hit by a car he was beaten and left in the cold to die . The saddest part is that we will probably never know for sure who and how or even why it happened unless someone talks then we will get a portion of it . I pray for his family that they can feel the peace and comfort from our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ .
Normally investigators would question someone in the proximity of the incident at the very least to clear them. Instead, Proctor and co.'s corruption got exposed which was enough reasonable doubt. If what you have is lying witnesses or corrupt police investigators in a criminal trial, what's left?
Ultimately, I would like to believe that even the most devout Karen accuser on that jury would still rule against guilty just based on the premise that the investigation was totally botched and there's no clear evidence to convict except based on Lally's "beliefs".
I started watching your channel during the Depp trial. This is now the second trial that's consumed my life and turned into something I watch every day. Big thanks to you for making these so engaging.
100% same thing with me! My ensglish just is not enough good to put words that all you did,all began with Dapp/Heard trial. I Wonder how my own life continues after this,it was "empty" some time Last time (Johnny/Amber) 😅 . Karen is innocent and framed like she says❤
Two other MAJOR misrepresentations of the evidence by Lally during his closing: 1) Lally insinuated that KR had deleted OJO's Ring camera footage from his computer(s). This directly contradicted the evidence of the CW's own witnesses: a) The CW's witness confirmed that the computer(s) did NOT have access to the Ring account. b) Only OJO's phone had access to the Ring account, and there is no evidence that KR ever had access to it; the CW never even tried to argue this. c) Trooper De Chico made note of Ring camera footage showing KR's return to OJO's house at 00:41; this footage has since gone missing. The footage disappeared while it was in MSP custody, and while the MSP had access to OJO's Ring account. 2) Lally stated that no one else's DNA was found on OJO's clothes. This was an utter misstatement of the evidence. Most of the swabs from stains on OJO's clothes came back with MIXTURES of DNA from MULTIPLE INDIVIDUALS. The foreign DNA did not match Troopers Bukhenik or Proctor, but was never tested against anyone else, particularly anyone in the Albert house. Now, it's entirely possible that the foreign had no connection to the case - that it was just picked up from the paramedics or hospital, etc. But it was deceptive of Lally to deny that the DNA mixtures were there at all. Overall, while it is expected that any lawyer will try to present evidence in the best possible light for their case, it was disheartening and alarming to see the prosecutor outright LYING about settled evidentiary facts.
also 3) he said John’s phone did not move from 12:25 until his body was discovered at 6 something. that’s a lie. it moved at 12:32. but that wouldn’t fit his new timeline, so he just left it out 4) “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him” (3x) turned into “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him!” (4x). let’s forget altogether that that statement never came into account until this trial, let’s just add an extra for effect
The Prosecution's Closing Argument was a weird see-saw between arguing that she's so wracked with guilt that she - admitted to hitting him with her car multiple times to multiple witnesses - didn't want to stay with JOK's family to grieve - had so much to drink (7+ drinks! With vodka in some of them!) to the point she can't remember if she hit him or not ("Did I hit him?!") and arguing that Karen Read is a callous criminal mastermind who - faked 50+ phone calls to give herself an alibi, knowing she left her boyfriend to die in the snow - tried to "get rid of the murder weapon" (by driving her car to her parents) - walked in wearing shoes into JOK's house the night of his death despite a strict no-shoes-rule, because _who cares what he thinks when he's dead?_ (LOL) - leads her "search party" straight to the body, because she must've known where he lied since she ran him over! Duh! - remembered to do all that while being drunk! This whole thing is laughable. Not even the Commonwealth's argument for themselves is consistent with itself.
My fiancé and I just started watching you. Constantly at the edge off our seats waiting for your views and comments on the Read trial! This channel is awesome!😅🎉🤗
I appreciate your thoughtful demeanor (even when you get spicy!) and that you pause live broadcasts to add commentary. Thank you for providing solid and compelling legal coverage. This jury has a serious job to do in a high profile polarizing case; it’s good that they’re taking their time with deliberations.
I saw you on STS and after hearing your comments I knew I had to subscribe to your channel too. I believe your comments and analysis of Lally's closing arguments were spot on. As someone who has been watching this trial IMO Jackson comes across as confident and sure of himself and Lally quite the opposite. Lally comes across to me like he's thinking "I hope the jury is buying this BS." If the jury does not find KR not guilty on all charges, then I will have lost all faith in our judicial system.
Don't forget, it was testified in another hearing that KR did NOT say 'I hit him". KR said things like, "Did I hit him?" "Could I have hit him?" Besides, CW "experts" stated that hitting OJO arm shattered the tail lite... we ALL saw the video around 5a.m. that her tail lite was NOT shattered. Imo, the 'shattering' of that tail lite happened during the 48 minutes of lost time from the sally port video.
Such an interesting case, such a beautiful lady, and such a brilliant mind to break it all down for all of us. Thank you for all your work on this case!
My only criticism for Jackson was that i wish he would've tied in and repeated the reasonable doubt a lot more than what we got. Like, it's wholly implied by his fantastic closing, but some people may not have the read-between-the-lines capability (especially after 9 weeks!) And need the actual examples of how " X creates reasonable doubt, you have to find her not guilty" "Y creates reasonable doubt, you have to find her not guilty" "z is now creating what a reasonable person would consider doubt, so you must not convict her of the charged crimes. Not guilty". If he could've somehow merged the corruption theory with the examples of clear reasonable doubt, then it'd be a golden closing and we'd probably have a verdict by now.
@LegalBytes Alyte ~ Your highly perceptive, forensic ability to dissect key parts of this trial & its closing arguments by both sides is... STELLAR 🌟 You've captured & kept my interest throughout with your compelling legal & personal (+ often fun!) insights these LONG 8+ weeks. Details matter, indeed. But, also your making legal 'stuff' SO accessible AND entertaining. THX🍀
I agree with your description of Attorney Jackson's closing argument as poetic. I thought it Shakespearen like a Mark Anthony's "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears." I hope Karen Read gets a not guilty verdict tomorrow and that the FBI follows up with an investigation into Proctor and his cohorts.
Watch CA in the back row in his Mr. Rogers sweater vest (it's hot outside and it is hot in the court room). Not even looking at Alan Jackson while he was doing his closing but looking else where.
I love your analysis, but the camera zooming in & out in this video makes it unwatchable for people with vertigo or who get seasick, etc (like me). Know you need to edit - any chance to keep the cam in one place so it's less of a jump? Xo
You're so right about that closing argument sounding almost poetic... like a song.. which, I bet the internet will get right on that! If they haven't already, that is.
What Lally pulled with the dimpling was straight up immoral. Before, I could sort of sympathize with him as potentially being stuck in the same tunnel vision as everyone else, and his convoluted case reflected his own brain's mess in trying to square the bad facts with his tunnel visioned "knowledge" that Read must be guilty. That dimpling stunt though? That was sure as heck premeditated (he asked about the dimpling earlier in the trial), and he knew it was nonsense (he didn't ask his own expert about the theory). He never would have tried that stunt in a normal state, where the defense goes 2nd. It was a crass attempt to manipulate the finders of fact in the case.
Didn't the CW "expert" say that they timed her route exactly to the minute to fit the CW "timeline,"? but that didn't let even a second for her to be back at 34 Fairview? He was miss characterizing the evidence... and let me not start at him stating something like did they give you evidence of that? To diss at one of the defenses arguments as if they are the ones required to prove things🙄
I really love watching these recaps and appreciate all of the effort you put in. I would really love it if you could cover the Gina Carano case with Disney. I think it's interesting and raises unique views on the implementation of the first amendment. It would also be amazing to look at the discovery phase of this case.
I didn't have time to be in any of the lives, and truly from all the lawyers I saw covering, your videos are the best - I love your calm way of explaining everything. Thanks for the recaps, I look forward to the next trial you cover.
What really strikes me about the defense is that the hue of jade that one sometimes discerns around the gills of a defense attorney was absolutely absent. They believe that she is innocent.
“To be faaaaiirrr…” Great job getting my echolalia to go off with that one 😂 I found you at about day 21, and I have watched every single one of these daily recap videos from you, a couple of lives, and I’m hoping to catch the verdict with you. Thank you for making this so easy to understand, and for adding those golden nuggets of laughter and making me say “I understood that reference!” out loud 🤣
I started watching you after the Depp trial like MANY others. I love your daily recaps and commentary, especially when you dumb things down for us! You should put the Idaho College murders on your radar, that is a WILD story as well. 4 college roomates allegedly murdered by a criminology major!
Alan Jackson is extremely masterful. However, I agree with one legal commentator, that he should have addressed the: "I hit him, I hit him, I hit him" supposed statement. This is probably the most compelling evidence if you believe it is true. I am one of those who do not. In fairness, he has only so much time though. I love his passion.
Lally flat out lied during his closing arguments more than twice. He said the only DNA found on John’s clothes were his or blood not true at least two other peoples were found.
I did hear AJ's closing described as slam poetry, so I see where you're coming from in regards to the beat Oh, the Lallyoop reminded me. What's the Lally Tally?
Alyte - thank you so much especially for your recaps. The streams are great but the recaps with your analysis are supremely helpful to understanding the evidence, procedures and arguments of the trial.
Thank you for your analysis. I've found it hard to watch much of this trial unfold, but now that we're at this stage, I've watched several analyses, and yours has been especially clear, complete, free of "ain't it awful" blathering, and helpful to me.
Well done on this one, Alyte! I’ve watched your trial coverage here and there since Depp v. Heard, so I’m not exactly a newcomer to the channel. I’ve mostly been a lurker in the live chats, perhaps coming back to leave a comment here or there… These recaps have been a godsend as I’ve struggled to make sense of this trial, even as I watched it live. Few trials have made me as anxious and angry as this one. I’ve questioned my own intelligence quite a bit; there were several points (mostly in the prosecution’s case in chief) where nothing I was hearing seemed to be plausible.
Thanks Alyte for your dedication in explaining the legal issues to us through this trial. I realized what you said about how skeptical you were in believing the cover-up and I noticed it (in the middle of the trial, I didn't understand why you were reluctant to believe that KR was framed and the target of a cover-up after seeing and listening to many testimonies). At first I thought KR was guilty because of a documentary I saw here on UA-cam, but when I heard the opening I started to open my eyes and ears and started to change that thought once the trial continued. Now that the trial is over I have 0 doubts that KR is guilty, she is even innocent and should be declared as such by the jury. She's a woman who could be any of us in the hands of people who are supposed to ensure justice and what they do is abuse their position and power. It's sad to see that part of the system is corrupted by corrupt people who for personal interests they don't care about ruining the lives of innocent people. KR deserves his life back, although the time lost and suffered willn't be able to recover it. I admire her, she was strong, not all of us in her situation would have the courage and ability to continue fighting against a corrupt system...
Thank you for your coverage of this trial! Both the recaps and the live streams have been amazing. Love how you explain and break down the law and paus during the live streams so explain things. Also, Jackson’s closing was well worth watching!
I went into this thinking she for sure killed JO but that changed so quick. I see so much reasonable doubt. Something else is i find it interesting that the Alberts made sure they said that they went out with chloe and kept an eye on her... like they were trying to establish an alibi? Like maybe she got out? Maybe she attacked JO outside and JM was calling the phone to try and locate it?
Your breakdown was perfect - I was unwilling until I heard this to give lally any credit at all but I understand that he did so some things that could be considered something at least. I still think Karen is factually innocent and really appreciated Jackson’s close. Masterful and hard to beat by any lawyer I’m sure 😊 FKR
Wow, never thought Lally would stoop even lower... But he did and blatantly lied and lied repeatedly. Also, not only are many of the police and law enforcement corrupt, but so is the prosecution.
This case should have been moved to Boston. There is too much corruption in this county. When you have the second juror state's, she does not like the way Karen's smiles, tell you something. The city and state police are corrupt. Need I say more
Am I being gaslit? Cause 'i hit him' was not in the police report or documented anywhere. It only came up later. If that's the case, that statement doesn't mean anything to me.
Question: now that juries and deliberation I want to ask you when it comes to the inverted lally port video, what do you think the chances are that he had known it was inverted, do you think that he would have mentioned it and said oh that was a mistake I had no idea that was not intentional? I was kind of feeling like him not addressing it at all made it seem like he knew what do you think?
There’s no denying Jackson put on a master class in public speaking and storytelling. I think it’s a common saying among authors to show, don’t tell. I also wonder what the jury is seeing in their heads during his argument. Are they remembering Jen McCabe’s testimony on cross? Michael Proctor’s texts and his relationship to the Alberts? Are they replaying the moment when the defense pointed out the sally port video is incorrect? Are they thinking about Dr Scordi Bello’s refusal to conclude John O’Keefe’s injuries were the result of a motor vehicle collision? Listening to Jackson, it reminded me of the many times the prosecution’s star witnesses left me with the impression they swore never to be caught giving straight answers. It also leaves the distinct impression that if they did, it would reflect really poorly for the Commonwealth. I thought it odd, too, for Lally to leave out the car collision from his timeline. At least at first. But after thinking about it, I think this is Lally’s tacit concession here that he can’t win on this point. The jury just got done listening to two doctors and two expert accident reconstructionists thoroughly debunk Trooper Paul’s testimony. Lally is stuck in damage control so he has to find ways to allude to the pivotal event of his argument without drawing too much attention to it.
If I have to give one thing to Lally , it's that he believes in the case he presents. He believes Karen is guilty and that he's getting justice for John. And I think that's where part of the frustration came from we saw at the end of the trial, bc other people aren't seeing what he sees and the defence is muddying it up. But that believe is also a pitfall, he seem to have fallen for confirmation bias as well and when evidence comes in that might disproof the case he presents than it happened different. No matter what got brought up Karen hit him with her car and left him to die. But the fact that what happened keeps changing and changing in this trial. How the evidence, witnesses, conclussions all keep moving and changing to the point that the prosecution has shown just as many theories as to how this could have happened as the defense hurts his case. Cause if this happened, without a reasobable doubt, than why does it keep changing. If it keeps changing to me it comes over as doubt. It comes over as the prosecution can't proof its case. And I can only imagine how frustrating that must be for Lally with the kind of case this has been. Even if I disagree with him
Thanks Alyte for the great recaps. Without your recaps, I would miss the important focuses of the day. No, I think you were spot on with Lally's closing statements. Do the jurors get a typed document of witness testimony to go over or do they have to rely on their notes only? However, I remember him putting out his arm without the video. So this just confirms further what Jackson's point is. And remembering small details which are not fact is what Lally said.
No transcripts, jury can only rely on their notes and memory of testimony. Transcripts can be wrong or lack certain subtle actions from the witness while on the stand and how they answered the questions.
what are you thoughts on what is taking the jury so long? seems like open and shut case all they have to do is agree if they beleive that she actually hit him with the car. it seems pretty clear to me she didn't.
Personally, knowing that the alleged "I hit him" statement was such a linchpin of the CW case, I was surprised that Jackson completely skipped over it and Lally opening strongly with I HIT HIM in his closing made it stick in my head (even though I had been watching the trial with y'all and had many reservations about the ultimate origin of the statement, like many of the chat did). IMO it might have been a good idea to cut the philosophical quote about lies (which were really not substantive and more of a dig at the witnesses) and assert that the supposed confession did not stand up to cross examination.
I assume you mean the quote specifically, as opposed to the lies told by CW/witnesses, was not really substantive. If so then fair enough but some people just really love quotes. Even Lally had one of his own at the end of his closing. Still you are right, I'm surprised Jackson didn't hit on KR supposed quote but I can only assume that since the judge gave each side only 1 hour Jackson went with what he did as he thought they were the strongest points to hit with just that time limit.
@@TheLuceon yeah, I'm referring to the flowery prose quote he broke out to illustrate that lying gets easier the more one does it, I think it was part of the reason he ran out of time during the end - there's a definite gap at the end of AJ's closing argument when the judge calls 5 minutes remaining and he visibly pauses to decide what to cut out of his remaining points before continuing on.
I think she's innocent. However, if she had done it, its the investigator, department, and Lally's fault that she's not going to be convicted. The whole thing was botched up to the end.
I think Jackson did a phenomenal job and I think KR is not guilty but I think he should have shown more empathy to the OKeefe family as they will never have answers as to what happened to him.
If I were in a jury and prosecution tried to claim any of Karen's statements were a confession, I might well be laughing in court. I'm literally "you think I'm a moron, do you?" A claimed "confession" better be a darn clear confession, otherwise you're just lost massive credibility with me. This happened in Murdaugh. The "I did them real bad" or whatever he said is ambiguous at best, even with the state's claim of what he said. The state convinced me he did it, but oh boy that claim by the state hurt their case bad. I was just thinking "really, you're relying on this??"
I only watched the closing arguments and just based on those, she should be not guilty. There is way too much reasonable doubt that there is no way she can be convicted guilty.
It's funny how people see things so differently!! The first person I heard opine on Ajax' closing said they thought Alan was out of sync, off kilter, & that it took a good 10-15 mins for him to find his rythum. I disagree. I did hear a couple of places he that didn't flow quite as seamlessly, but the closing, overall, was fabulous!! He & Yaneti have very different styles but they're ea worth every penny they were paid. I had to laugh at Kevin (Plevin - TBs arch enemy from The Yellow Cottage UA-cam channel) as he said these guys left a lot to be desired, didn't pull the case together, etc. Hard to belive they STILL have him on Court TV as an expert!! That's hysterical!! Kevin, for his video, donned his wrinkled button-down & clip on tie & narrated himself giving HIS closing argument!! I had to go watch after mark Bederow continued to joke about this day after day since the guy posted it. It is funny!! 17 min of your life you'll never get back but truly, worth every second!! My belly still hurts!! Anyway, thanks for all your do!! I'm hopeful we'll get an answer tomorrow. It's a Fri so perhaps they'll want to get it done & not have to come back to the courthouse Monday morning. If at all possible, I'd really like to see that happen. We'll see. I thought we'd hear by now but, since we haven't, all I can assume is they're doing their job, going thru everything, & probably still trying to make sense of the jury form (slip) or the god-awful jury instructions. Those might've taken the entire first day. They're rough!!
23:07 - 'burden of bulletproof' ive been loving these recaps and am invested to seeing the outcome of this trail. It's my honest opinion that there is no way they've presented enough concrete evidence to secure a conviction, I will be very surprised if the return with a guilty verdict.
JN also said MM went from the car; they were all sat in to leave, yet the car windows needed clearing of ice so MM went back in to get his jkt but came out without it. Was it the thick padded jkt the emt said he saw cut away off JO? When MM was asked about him going from the car, back into the house, MM said he didn't ...
shouldn’t it be if there is ANY reasonable doubt on the prosecutions case it’s suppose to be a NOT GUILTY verdict? What is going on with these jurors? Besides the fact they may be scared of those shady af cops in their town! The McMcalberts should have been escorted out of that courtroom PERIOD
One issue for me with the defense closing, is that they leaned so hard into the conspiracy/coverup. You almost got the sense that you were there to convict everyone else. I would much rather have had some strong, repeated reiterating the fact that you DON’T have to find a conspiracy - you JUST have to see whether there are *any* other equally or more likely reasons the evidence showed what it did. A lot of pro-prosecution people I see arguing, talk about how unlikely the conspiracy is, but the thing is: for what the jury has to decide it’s near completely irrelevant! The prosecutions evidence simply didn’t show that theirs was the ONLY likely scenario (if you even find it likely at all that someone could be fatally struck by a car with NO body bruising)
Thanks for doing this one. I have to admit I've tried watching Lally's closings 3 times now (1st with EDB, 2nd with you & 3rd with Runkle) but found myself checking out after about 15 mins each time as I just can't listen to his obvious bs and monotone what if any, sorta voice! AJs closing was great though I'd already fully made up my mind on NG as soon as the 2 FED experts testified
I'm curious how much choice Lally had in bringing the case. Would he have been in a position to drop the case if he wanted to? The officer testifying that physics don't work the same on the human body as they do on a car absolutely killed it for me. I'm no physicist, but if Mass A hits Mass B at X speed, how far does Mass B travel while under Earth's gravity? Hell, even ignore the side swipe thing and assume Mass B takes the impact's full force. Even if it's an oversimplification, it should still give an upper limit on how far his body would be from the point of impact. Thirty feet sounds improbable to me, but some kind of math would convince me better than what we got. Show your work, sir.
I am sad that we will not know what happened to John. Any evidence that could've been found in the house, on the dogs claws, anywhere in the area, in the Ford edge etc is long gone now. So f*cking sad. If only they had done their job and investigated like they should have and with the potential culprit being innocent until proven guilty.
Even the illedged third party culprits should be upset with the investigators for not looking into them at all. If these officers asked Brian Albert if they could take a take a quick look around the house. If the prosecution asked to look at any of these people's phones just to look at briefly then at least they would have the appearance that they didn't have tunnel vision.
If Canton PD would have attempted to secure the crime scene by leaving an officer to monitor to be sure no one tampered with the crime scene the it would be much easier to believe that it was not compromised. If the evidence was properly documented and a log sheet existed then people would not be skeptical of the chain of custody.
It they had taken photos of the taillight damage before transferring it to their custody, it would be much more convincing that the taillight was completely shattered before law inforcement had access to it.
If witness interviews were done in a timely manner and promptly memorialized in affidavits signed by the witnesses, then it would be much more believable that people weren't changing their account after the fact.
The list goes on an on.
It is absolutely heartbreaking that no one will truly know what happened to John that night, regardless of the outcome and verdict. It breaks my heart for the family to be so consumed and put all their faith into the Common Weath.. just to be let down, in my opinion.
I think JM family have a pretty good idea of what could have happened and I think they are pretty sure that it wasn’t KR but they didn’t like her to start with and in the beginning they may have thought she had something to do with it but after sitting through the trial they had to know she wasn’t responsible for his death. They definitely have to have many questions after the defense had there defense of how many 3 and they weren’t hired by the defense , they were from the FBI’s investigation. This man wasn’t hit by a car he was beaten and left in the cold to die . The saddest part is that we will probably never know for sure who and how or even why it happened unless someone talks then we will get a portion of it . I pray for his family that they can feel the peace and comfort from our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ .
Normally investigators would question someone in the proximity of the incident at the very least to clear them. Instead, Proctor and co.'s corruption got exposed which was enough reasonable doubt. If what you have is lying witnesses or corrupt police investigators in a criminal trial, what's left?
Ultimately, I would like to believe that even the most devout Karen accuser on that jury would still rule against guilty just based on the premise that the investigation was totally botched and there's no clear evidence to convict except based on Lally's "beliefs".
Let's hope you're right
Lally said it himself. The prosecution has nothing but 'little things'. The Defence has all the big things.
I started watching your channel during the Depp trial. This is now the second trial that's consumed my life and turned into something I watch every day. Big thanks to you for making these so engaging.
Prepare for the void that comes after 😢
Me, too. And the Amber Heard simps are here. Simping for Lackluster Lally.
Same here, was introduced to the whole Depp v Heard trial by LegalBytes primer video.
SAME!!!
100% same thing with me! My ensglish just is not enough good to put words that all you did,all began with Dapp/Heard trial. I Wonder how my own life continues after this,it was "empty" some time Last time (Johnny/Amber) 😅 . Karen is innocent and framed like she says❤
Two other MAJOR misrepresentations of the evidence by Lally during his closing:
1) Lally insinuated that KR had deleted OJO's Ring camera footage from his computer(s). This directly contradicted the evidence of the CW's own witnesses:
a) The CW's witness confirmed that the computer(s) did NOT have access to the Ring account.
b) Only OJO's phone had access to the Ring account, and there is no evidence that KR ever had access to it; the CW never even tried to argue this.
c) Trooper De Chico made note of Ring camera footage showing KR's return to OJO's house at 00:41; this footage has since gone missing. The footage disappeared while it was in MSP custody, and while the MSP had access to OJO's Ring account.
2) Lally stated that no one else's DNA was found on OJO's clothes. This was an utter misstatement of the evidence. Most of the swabs from stains on OJO's clothes came back with MIXTURES of DNA from MULTIPLE INDIVIDUALS. The foreign DNA did not match Troopers Bukhenik or Proctor, but was never tested against anyone else, particularly anyone in the Albert house. Now, it's entirely possible that the foreign had no connection to the case - that it was just picked up from the paramedics or hospital, etc. But it was deceptive of Lally to deny that the DNA mixtures were there at all.
Overall, while it is expected that any lawyer will try to present evidence in the best possible light for their case, it was disheartening and alarming to see the prosecutor outright LYING about settled evidentiary facts.
also
3) he said John’s phone did not move from 12:25 until his body was discovered at 6 something. that’s a lie. it moved at 12:32. but that wouldn’t fit his new timeline, so he just left it out
4) “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him” (3x) turned into “I hit him, I hit him, I hit him, I hit him!” (4x). let’s forget altogether that that statement never came into account until this trial, let’s just add an extra for effect
I thought it was only 3 time “I hot him” things keep changing with lallys closing 😂😂
@@jmardino “I can say with 100% clarity, Chloe said I BIT HIM I BIT HIM I BIT HIM” -Jennifer McCabe 🙈
“I can tell you with 100% clarity, Chloe said ‘I BIT HIM I BIT HIM I BIT HIM!” Jennifer McCabe
3 times "I hit him?" As a question & not a statement! After JM planting the seed..imo. Karen was in a very vulnerable state😢
I don't understand how Adam Lally was allowed to stand up there and blatantly lie and completely misrepresent evidence. He disgusts me.
The Commonwealth has done it throughout the trial... So I wasn't surprised they did it in closing
The Prosecution's Closing Argument was a weird see-saw between arguing that she's so wracked with guilt that she
- admitted to hitting him with her car multiple times to multiple witnesses
- didn't want to stay with JOK's family to grieve
- had so much to drink (7+ drinks! With vodka in some of them!) to the point she can't remember if she hit him or not ("Did I hit him?!")
and arguing that Karen Read is a callous criminal mastermind who
- faked 50+ phone calls to give herself an alibi, knowing she left her boyfriend to die in the snow
- tried to "get rid of the murder weapon" (by driving her car to her parents)
- walked in wearing shoes into JOK's house the night of his death despite a strict no-shoes-rule, because _who cares what he thinks when he's dead?_ (LOL)
- leads her "search party" straight to the body, because she must've known where he lied since she ran him over! Duh!
- remembered to do all that while being drunk!
This whole thing is laughable. Not even the Commonwealth's argument for themselves is consistent with itself.
My fiancé and I just started watching you. Constantly at the edge off our seats waiting for your views and comments on the Read trial! This channel is awesome!😅🎉🤗
I appreciate your thoughtful demeanor (even when you get spicy!) and that you pause live broadcasts to add commentary. Thank you for providing solid and compelling legal coverage. This jury has a serious job to do in a high profile polarizing case; it’s good that they’re taking their time with deliberations.
I saw you on STS and after hearing your comments I knew I had to subscribe to your channel too. I believe your comments and analysis of Lally's closing arguments were spot on. As someone who has been watching this trial IMO Jackson comes across as confident and sure of himself and Lally quite the opposite. Lally comes across to me like he's thinking "I hope the jury is buying this BS." If the jury does not find KR not guilty on all charges, then I will have lost all faith in our judicial system.
Thank you so much and welcome!! Also glad to have you here!!
Okay... I'll be honest. Yes, I did refresh UA-cam more than once for this recap throughout the day. 🤫
Same 😂❤
Alan Jackson's closing was fire
Don't forget, it was testified in another hearing that KR did NOT say 'I hit him". KR said things like, "Did I hit him?" "Could I have hit him?" Besides, CW "experts" stated that hitting OJO arm shattered the tail lite... we ALL saw the video around 5a.m. that her tail lite was NOT shattered. Imo, the 'shattering' of that tail lite happened during the 48 minutes of lost time from the sally port video.
You've been absolutely amazing. I want to be on this channel when the verdict is given!
Such an interesting case, such a beautiful lady, and such a brilliant mind to break it all down for all of us. Thank you for all your work on this case!
Thank you so much for covering this case and also for being a guest on other channels. It's been a great case....very complex.
Thanks for the great video mam.
My only criticism for Jackson was that i wish he would've tied in and repeated the reasonable doubt a lot more than what we got. Like, it's wholly implied by his fantastic closing, but some people may not have the read-between-the-lines capability (especially after 9 weeks!) And need the actual examples of how " X creates reasonable doubt, you have to find her not guilty" "Y creates reasonable doubt, you have to find her not guilty" "z is now creating what a reasonable person would consider doubt, so you must not convict her of the charged crimes. Not guilty". If he could've somehow merged the corruption theory with the examples of clear reasonable doubt, then it'd be a golden closing and we'd probably have a verdict by now.
He got a 5 minute warning then skipped some notes - it was probably there. Skipped to ARCCA testimony!
There is definitely reasonable doubt !!!
@LegalBytes Alyte ~ Your highly perceptive, forensic ability to dissect key parts of this trial & its closing arguments by both sides is... STELLAR 🌟 You've captured & kept my interest throughout with your compelling legal & personal (+ often fun!) insights these LONG 8+ weeks. Details matter, indeed. But, also your making legal 'stuff' SO accessible AND entertaining. THX🍀
I appreciate your commentary! I watched you since Depp vs Heard. I love that you keep an open mind and look at both sides.
I agree with your description of Attorney Jackson's closing argument as poetic. I thought it Shakespearen like a Mark Anthony's "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears." I hope Karen Read gets a not guilty verdict tomorrow and that the FBI follows up with an investigation into Proctor and his cohorts.
Watch CA in the back row in his Mr. Rogers sweater vest (it's hot outside and it is hot in the court room). Not even looking at Alan Jackson while he was doing his closing but looking else where.
I love your analysis, but the camera zooming in & out in this video makes it unwatchable for people with vertigo or who get seasick, etc (like me). Know you need to edit - any chance to keep the cam in one place so it's less of a jump? Xo
You're so right about that closing argument sounding almost poetic... like a song.. which, I bet the internet will get right on that! If they haven't already, that is.
What Lally pulled with the dimpling was straight up immoral. Before, I could sort of sympathize with him as potentially being stuck in the same tunnel vision as everyone else, and his convoluted case reflected his own brain's mess in trying to square the bad facts with his tunnel visioned "knowledge" that Read must be guilty.
That dimpling stunt though? That was sure as heck premeditated (he asked about the dimpling earlier in the trial), and he knew it was nonsense (he didn't ask his own expert about the theory). He never would have tried that stunt in a normal state, where the defense goes 2nd. It was a crass attempt to manipulate the finders of fact in the case.
Didn't the CW "expert" say that they timed her route exactly to the minute to fit the CW "timeline,"? but that didn't let even a second for her to be back at 34 Fairview? He was miss characterizing the evidence... and let me not start at him stating something like did they give you evidence of that? To diss at one of the defenses arguments as if they are the ones required to prove things🙄
I feel like we all came for the trial...but we all stayed for alyte. Its been one heck of a journey. Fantastic content.
Personally I don’t think we should be prosecuting people based on “little things”
I really love watching these recaps and appreciate all of the effort you put in. I would really love it if you could cover the Gina Carano case with Disney. I think it's interesting and raises unique views on the implementation of the first amendment. It would also be amazing to look at the discovery phase of this case.
I didn't have time to be in any of the lives, and truly from all the lawyers I saw covering, your videos are the best - I love your calm way of explaining everything.
Thanks for the recaps, I look forward to the next trial you cover.
I agree. She didn't hit him. This whole trial was a joke and a waste. I'm glad I watched it, though.
Thank you for your streams on this supplemented by your recaps. I will follow you on future trials as your format and your commentary is the best.
What really strikes me about the defense is that the hue of jade that one sometimes discerns around the gills of a defense attorney was absolutely absent. They believe that she is innocent.
“To be faaaaiirrr…” Great job getting my echolalia to go off with that one 😂
I found you at about day 21, and I have watched every single one of these daily recap videos from you, a couple of lives, and I’m hoping to catch the verdict with you. Thank you for making this so easy to understand, and for adding those golden nuggets of laughter and making me say “I understood that reference!” out loud 🤣
Haha I'm glad you enjoyed it!!
I was waiting for this! I love your recaps!
I started watching you after the Depp trial like MANY others. I love your daily recaps and commentary, especially when you dumb things down for us! You should put the Idaho College murders on your radar, that is a WILD story as well. 4 college roomates allegedly murdered by a criminology major!
Alan Jackson is extremely masterful. However, I agree with one legal commentator, that he should have addressed the: "I hit him, I hit him, I hit him" supposed statement. This is probably the most compelling evidence if you believe it is true. I am one of those who do not. In fairness, he has only so much time though. I love his passion.
Lally flat out lied during his closing arguments more than twice. He said the only DNA found on John’s clothes were his or blood not true at least two other peoples were found.
Love your kind vibe.
I did hear AJ's closing described as slam poetry, so I see where you're coming from in regards to the beat
Oh, the Lallyoop reminded me. What's the Lally Tally?
Alyte - thank you so much especially for your recaps. The streams are great but the recaps with your analysis are supremely helpful to understanding the evidence, procedures and arguments of the trial.
i have been refreshing all day waiting for this! thank you for you incredible hard work on this! i love watching your content! ❤
Thank you for your analysis. I've found it hard to watch much of this trial unfold, but now that we're at this stage, I've watched several analyses, and yours has been especially clear, complete, free of "ain't it awful" blathering, and helpful to me.
Well done on this one, Alyte! I’ve watched your trial coverage here and there since Depp v. Heard, so I’m not exactly a newcomer to the channel. I’ve mostly been a lurker in the live chats, perhaps coming back to leave a comment here or there… These recaps have been a godsend as I’ve struggled to make sense of this trial, even as I watched it live. Few trials have made me as anxious and angry as this one. I’ve questioned my own intelligence quite a bit; there were several points (mostly in the prosecution’s case in chief) where nothing I was hearing seemed to be plausible.
Thanks Alyte for your dedication in explaining the legal issues to us through this trial. I realized what you said about how skeptical you were in believing the cover-up and I noticed it (in the middle of the trial, I didn't understand why you were reluctant to believe that KR was framed and the target of a cover-up after seeing and listening to many testimonies). At first I thought KR was guilty because of a documentary I saw here on UA-cam, but when I heard the opening I started to open my eyes and ears and started to change that thought once the trial continued. Now that the trial is over I have 0 doubts that KR is guilty, she is even innocent and should be declared as such by the jury. She's a woman who could be any of us in the hands of people who are supposed to ensure justice and what they do is abuse their position and power. It's sad to see that part of the system is corrupted by corrupt people who for personal interests they don't care about ruining the lives of innocent people. KR deserves his life back, although the time lost and suffered willn't be able to recover it. I admire her, she was strong, not all of us in her situation would have the courage and ability to continue fighting against a corrupt system...
I subscribed during this trial. You're analysis has been clear and consise. Thank you.
Thank you for your coverage of this trial! Both the recaps and the live streams have been amazing. Love how you explain and break down the law and paus during the live streams so explain things.
Also, Jackson’s closing was well worth watching!
Alyte, all the recaps in this trail have been awesome! Thank you so much!!!❤
I went into this thinking she for sure killed JO but that changed so quick. I see so much reasonable doubt.
Something else is i find it interesting that the Alberts made sure they said that they went out with chloe and kept an eye on her... like they were trying to establish an alibi? Like maybe she got out? Maybe she attacked JO outside and JM was calling the phone to try and locate it?
This trial, and the ysl trial SCARE THE HELL OUT OF ME! The government just decides your guilty and sets out too insinuate it!!
AJ’s closing was blunt and hard hitting! ❤
Great recap Alyte! And u ROCKED it on STS last night! 💕💕 I’m still hopeful for a NG!!!
Thank you so much!!
I've watched this everyday and am so happy I found your channel. I can't wait for the next one you announced but I need the jury to conclude 😭😭
Your breakdown was perfect - I was unwilling until I heard this to give lally any credit at all but I understand that he did so some things that could be considered something at least. I still think Karen is factually innocent and really appreciated Jackson’s close. Masterful and hard to beat by any lawyer I’m sure 😊 FKR
Love your breakdowns! So clear and articulate, getting to the heart of the matter.
I've enjoyed your coverage.. best live chat on UA-cam... Jackson's photos should seal the deal....
Wow, complimenting Lally on his volume. Big praise 😂
Is it some kind of professional breach to lie to the jury. They weren’t allowed notes to note things to check!
Wow, never thought Lally would stoop even lower... But he did and blatantly lied and lied repeatedly. Also, not only are many of the police and law enforcement corrupt, but so is the prosecution.
Awesome recap as always!
What trial will you cover next? Will you be covering Donna Adelson’s trial in Aug?
This case should have been moved to Boston. There is too much corruption in this county.
When you have the second juror state's, she does not like the way Karen's smiles, tell you something.
The city and state police are corrupt. Need I say more
25:23 this annoys me to no end....they always said 3 times...not 4 ...and I don't even believe that
Am I being gaslit? Cause 'i hit him' was not in the police report or documented anywhere. It only came up later. If that's the case, that statement doesn't mean anything to me.
I enjoy your channel.
Question: now that juries and deliberation I want to ask you when it comes to the inverted lally port video, what do you think the chances are that he had known it was inverted, do you think that he would have mentioned it and said oh that was a mistake I had no idea that was not intentional? I was kind of feeling like him not addressing it at all made it seem like he knew what do you think?
You're exactly right... he had to know
There’s no denying Jackson put on a master class in public speaking and storytelling. I think it’s a common saying among authors to show, don’t tell. I also wonder what the jury is seeing in their heads during his argument. Are they remembering Jen McCabe’s testimony on cross? Michael Proctor’s texts and his relationship to the Alberts? Are they replaying the moment when the defense pointed out the sally port video is incorrect? Are they thinking about Dr Scordi Bello’s refusal to conclude John O’Keefe’s injuries were the result of a motor vehicle collision?
Listening to Jackson, it reminded me of the many times the prosecution’s star witnesses left me with the impression they swore never to be caught giving straight answers. It also leaves the distinct impression that if they did, it would reflect really poorly for the Commonwealth.
I thought it odd, too, for Lally to leave out the car collision from his timeline. At least at first. But after thinking about it, I think this is Lally’s tacit concession here that he can’t win on this point. The jury just got done listening to two doctors and two expert accident reconstructionists thoroughly debunk Trooper Paul’s testimony. Lally is stuck in damage control so he has to find ways to allude to the pivotal event of his argument without drawing too much attention to it.
Girl I need you to react on the verdict slip ASAP
If I have to give one thing to Lally , it's that he believes in the case he presents. He believes Karen is guilty and that he's getting justice for John. And I think that's where part of the frustration came from we saw at the end of the trial, bc other people aren't seeing what he sees and the defence is muddying it up. But that believe is also a pitfall, he seem to have fallen for confirmation bias as well and when evidence comes in that might disproof the case he presents than it happened different. No matter what got brought up Karen hit him with her car and left him to die. But the fact that what happened keeps changing and changing in this trial. How the evidence, witnesses, conclussions all keep moving and changing to the point that the prosecution has shown just as many theories as to how this could have happened as the defense hurts his case. Cause if this happened, without a reasobable doubt, than why does it keep changing. If it keeps changing to me it comes over as doubt. It comes over as the prosecution can't proof its case. And I can only imagine how frustrating that must be for Lally with the kind of case this has been. Even if I disagree with him
Glad we’re done w Lally
Thanks Alyte for the great recaps. Without your recaps, I would miss the important focuses of the day. No, I think you were spot on with Lally's closing statements. Do the jurors get a typed document of witness testimony to go over or do they have to rely on their notes only? However, I remember him putting out his arm without the video. So this just confirms further what Jackson's point is. And remembering small details which are not fact is what Lally said.
No transcripts, jury can only rely on their notes and memory of testimony. Transcripts can be wrong or lack certain subtle actions from the witness while on the stand and how they answered the questions.
@@TheLuceonthank you. That makes a good point about the possibility that the transcripts could have type o's and such.
@@TheLuceon in some jurisdictions they don’t even get to keep their notes and can only rely on their own memory. Which is crazy to me on a long trial!
what are you thoughts on what is taking the jury so long? seems like open and shut case all they have to do is agree if they beleive that she actually hit him with the car. it seems pretty clear to me she didn't.
she answered this question in her community post if you want to check it out!
Apparently there's an ex Canton cop on the jury
@@ThinWhite_Duke i doubt the defense would have let that get through during jury selection.
@@waltdog5791 There is an ex-cop but I've been told he worked in Norfolk
Personally, knowing that the alleged "I hit him" statement was such a linchpin of the CW case, I was surprised that Jackson completely skipped over it and Lally opening strongly with I HIT HIM in his closing made it stick in my head (even though I had been watching the trial with y'all and had many reservations about the ultimate origin of the statement, like many of the chat did).
IMO it might have been a good idea to cut the philosophical quote about lies (which were really not substantive and more of a dig at the witnesses) and assert that the supposed confession did not stand up to cross examination.
I assume you mean the quote specifically, as opposed to the lies told by CW/witnesses, was not really substantive. If so then fair enough but some people just really love quotes. Even Lally had one of his own at the end of his closing. Still you are right, I'm surprised Jackson didn't hit on KR supposed quote but I can only assume that since the judge gave each side only 1 hour Jackson went with what he did as he thought they were the strongest points to hit with just that time limit.
@@TheLuceon yeah, I'm referring to the flowery prose quote he broke out to illustrate that lying gets easier the more one does it, I think it was part of the reason he ran out of time during the end - there's a definite gap at the end of AJ's closing argument when the judge calls 5 minutes remaining and he visibly pauses to decide what to cut out of his remaining points before continuing on.
I think she's innocent. However, if she had done it, its the investigator, department, and Lally's fault that she's not going to be convicted. The whole thing was botched up to the end.
I think Jackson did a phenomenal job and I think KR is not guilty but I think he should have shown more empathy to the OKeefe family as they will never have answers as to what happened to him.
Thanks!
I can’t fathom how this is on the way to being a hung jury….
18:11 major jumpscare look at the top right corner I thought the “TV” in the courtTV logo was a devil or blood or something on that woman’s face 💀😅
The defense closing was slam poetry
Great work, thank you. Imo you weren't harsh enough on Lally.
The time and money spent on this flimsy case are a disgrace. I guess Massachusetts has solved all their other problems.
If I were in a jury and prosecution tried to claim any of Karen's statements were a confession, I might well be laughing in court. I'm literally "you think I'm a moron, do you?"
A claimed "confession" better be a darn clear confession, otherwise you're just lost massive credibility with me.
This happened in Murdaugh. The "I did them real bad" or whatever he said is ambiguous at best, even with the state's claim of what he said.
The state convinced me he did it, but oh boy that claim by the state hurt their case bad. I was just thinking "really, you're relying on this??"
I only watched the closing arguments and just based on those, she should be not guilty. There is way too much reasonable doubt that there is no way she can be convicted guilty.
Do you think Lally actually believes what he’s saying, or is he just doing the best he can with what he’s got?
Lally was just arranging deck chairs on the titanic...
It's funny how people see things so differently!! The first person I heard opine on Ajax' closing said they thought Alan was out of sync, off kilter, & that it took a good 10-15 mins for him to find his rythum. I disagree. I did hear a couple of places he that didn't flow quite as seamlessly, but the closing, overall, was fabulous!! He & Yaneti have very different styles but they're ea worth every penny they were paid. I had to laugh at Kevin (Plevin - TBs arch enemy from The Yellow Cottage UA-cam channel) as he said these guys left a lot to be desired, didn't pull the case together, etc. Hard to belive they STILL have him on Court TV as an expert!! That's hysterical!! Kevin, for his video, donned his wrinkled button-down & clip on tie & narrated himself giving HIS closing argument!! I had to go watch after mark Bederow continued to joke about this day after day since the guy posted it. It is funny!! 17 min of your life you'll never get back but truly, worth every second!! My belly still hurts!!
Anyway, thanks for all your do!! I'm hopeful we'll get an answer tomorrow. It's a Fri so perhaps they'll want to get it done & not have to come back to the courthouse Monday morning. If at all possible, I'd really like to see that happen. We'll see. I thought we'd hear by now but, since we haven't, all I can assume is they're doing their job, going thru everything, & probably still trying to make sense of the jury form (slip) or the god-awful jury instructions. Those might've taken the entire first day. They're rough!!
I really hope they take exactly 16 hours to deliberate. Just to really rub it in.
23:07 - 'burden of bulletproof' ive been loving these recaps and am invested to seeing the outcome of this trail. It's my honest opinion that there is no way they've presented enough concrete evidence to secure a conviction, I will be very surprised if the return with a guilty verdict.
JN also said MM went from the car; they were all sat in to leave, yet the car windows needed clearing of ice so MM went back in to get his jkt but came out without it. Was it the thick padded jkt the emt said he saw cut away off JO? When MM was asked about him going from the car, back into the house, MM said he didn't ...
shouldn’t it be if there is ANY reasonable doubt on the prosecutions case it’s suppose to be a NOT GUILTY verdict? What is going on with these jurors? Besides the fact they may be scared of those shady af cops in their town! The McMcalberts should have been escorted out of that courtroom PERIOD
One issue for me with the defense closing, is that they leaned so hard into the conspiracy/coverup. You almost got the sense that you were there to convict everyone else.
I would much rather have had some strong, repeated reiterating the fact that you DON’T have to find a conspiracy - you JUST have to see whether there are *any* other equally or more likely reasons the evidence showed what it did.
A lot of pro-prosecution people I see arguing, talk about how unlikely the conspiracy is, but the thing is: for what the jury has to decide it’s near completely irrelevant!
The prosecutions evidence simply didn’t show that theirs was the ONLY likely scenario (if you even find it likely at all that someone could be fatally struck by a car with NO body bruising)
Word has it there's an ex canton cop on the jury 🙄
He's a Norfolk cop.. retired
But no doubt he knows the Albert's
Thanks for doing this one. I have to admit I've tried watching Lally's closings 3 times now (1st with EDB, 2nd with you & 3rd with Runkle) but found myself checking out after about 15 mins each time as I just can't listen to his obvious bs and monotone what if any, sorta voice! AJs closing was great though I'd already fully made up my mind on NG as soon as the 2 FED experts testified
I fell asleep about 20 minutes into Lally’s closing. I haven’t gone back to finish it yet.
I'm curious how much choice Lally had in bringing the case. Would he have been in a position to drop the case if he wanted to?
The officer testifying that physics don't work the same on the human body as they do on a car absolutely killed it for me. I'm no physicist, but if Mass A hits Mass B at X speed, how far does Mass B travel while under Earth's gravity? Hell, even ignore the side swipe thing and assume Mass B takes the impact's full force. Even if it's an oversimplification, it should still give an upper limit on how far his body would be from the point of impact. Thirty feet sounds improbable to me, but some kind of math would convince me better than what we got. Show your work, sir.
How is it not a bigger deal they flipped the video? Aren’t there laws against tampering with evidence?
The Lally loop is the reason we are still here 84 years later
Wa-wa-wait, how about the fact that Lally emphasized that there was no DNA on John's clothes other than his, which so not true?
Lally the laughable court jester.
Jackson's a LOWER savant, Amazing 👏
Anyone remember what the last ‘what if any’ count was?? Please??
Lally said ‘I hit him’ was said only three times during this case lol now he’s saying it FOUR TIMES in his closing! He’s a boring joke