Karen Read Trial Day 31 RECAP – The Closing Arguments | LAWYER EXPLAINS

49 thoughts on “Karen Read Trial Day 31 RECAP – The Closing Arguments | LAWYER EXPLAINS”

1. 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.

2. I feel like we all came for the trial…but we all stayed for alyte. Its been one heck of a journey. Fantastic content.

3. She's guilty and she knows it. She didn't mean to kill him but she knows she hit him. I don't see why she would be "framed' by Boston police,. I hope she's found guilty of manslaughter.

4. "I hit him!" Says a woman in shock and grief. Yeah, you can't convince me that there isn't systematic sexism here. Hysterical woman = witch

5. I can’t fathom how this is on the way to being a hung jury….

6. Not the clown sound with the arms out 😂😂😂

7. @LegalBytes… I hope you see this. Although it's not a televised case, I think you'd be interested in hearing about another case in a town over from Canton, MA. Alleged corruption on another level. Search Sandra Birchmore, Stoughton, MA. Insane.

8. Karen is being FRAMED!!!!!!

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. I subscribed during this trial. You're analysis has been clear and consise. Thank you.

12. Karen’s Clothing: I think if I was her attorney I would have softened clothing up: Peter Pan Collar, A ruffle shirt under her suit jacket. Think: Claudine Longet (Andy Williams ex) in the Spider trial. Karen is lovely but I think she can come across a bit harsh. My side hustle is paralegal and in one of my classes we had to sit in on court trials (various types) and courts. I think court clothing matters. I think they dressed her like an attorney and this makes her look strong and independent.

13. 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.

14. The two independent accident experts said John was not hit by a car. The state's expert could not spell the word physics. The ME can't say how John died. Case over, that's a reasonable double. It should not take this long.

15. 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?

16. 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.

17. Personally I don’t think we should be prosecuting people based on “little things”

18. I don’t think the “why would the Albert’s drop JOK off on his front lawn” defense works for the Albert’s. To me it makes the most sense. They wouldn’t want to risk lugging a body through the neighborhood to drop him off somewhere else. Where would they throw him that makes logical sense? Why would they risk being spotted on neighbors ring cameras? A body in the front lawn of where is he was dropped off (maybe he got hit by a car or plow truck) a body discarded somewhere (now we have to fill in the gaps of how he got there and the Albert’s would have no control over being spotted) sorry this has been bothering me and I needed to vent.

19. “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 🤣

20. Great recap Alyte! And u ROCKED it on STS last night! 💕💕 I’m still hopeful for a NG!!!

21. Lally is a … that liar actually got up there in court and straight up lied. I'm sure plenty of people can point things out he lied about so lets do that. He said McLaughlin claimed when KR said 'I hit him, I hit him, I hit him' that McLaughlin asked KR to clarify, when what McLaughlin ACTUALLY testified to was a police officer standing near by asked KR to clarify and then the police officer got on the radio and asked to get SGT Goode to the scene. Since literally NOBODY ELSE testified to that happening, including the officers on scene, well I guess Lally decided to lie to make the scene fit for his BS story.

22. This trial, and the ysl trial SCARE THE HELL OUT OF ME! The government just decides your guilty and sets out too insinuate it!!

23. 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?

24. 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.

25. 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.

26. 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

27. Who is the girl in the back in white? Is she there for Okeefes?

28. 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

29. 25:23 this annoys me to no end….they always said 3 times…not 4 …and I don't even believe that

30. I honestly cant believe they haven't come back yet..

31. 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

32. Anyone remember what the last ‘what if any’ count was?? Please??

33. 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

34. Love your kind vibe.

35. 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.

36. Hi!

37. 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.

38. Is it some kind of professional breach to lie to the jury. They weren’t allowed notes to note things to check!

39. Great work, thank you. Imo you weren't harsh enough on Lally.

40. 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.

41. 3:32 alyte you are white bread when it comes to analysis… not spicy at all. but thats why i watch you

42. The jury should have been told very clearly that the CW had to prove she did it and the defense only had to show that there is reasonable doubt.
    Not that the defense has to prove conspiracy or who else did it.
    If the jury had understood that job, they would be back with not guilty already.
    But obviously they didn't get that. And now we may have a hung jury or even a guilty.
    Scary.

43. 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??"

44. I don't understand how Adam Lally was allowed to stand up there and blatantly lie and completely misrepresent evidence. He disgusts me.

45. 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.

46. 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 …

47. Alyte, all the recaps in this trail have been awesome! Thank you so much!!!❤

48. 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.

49. 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.

Comments are closed.