[ithos]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Facts matter and this post is short on facts, long on speculation and innuendo..

Dismissed: Judge dismisses some charges against '''Turtleboy,''' but rejects First Amendment argument

Found Not Guilty: Aidan Kearney a.k.a. '''Turtleboy''' acquitted of restraining order violation

TurtleBoy is a pugnacious independent journalist that exposes abuses and corruption of those who have been granted considerable power and influence inherent of their government roles. His motives are righteous despite the fact he has a potty mouth.
He has also done a magnificent job of making the the scapegoating of Karen Read a cause célèbre.

[ithos]

Originally Posted by KAM+6

Yes, the video of actuall trial is correct of Barros. The CROSS by Brennan where Barros ADMITTED that what he saw was EXACTLY like the taillight he saw, NOT like the photo Shown by defence of the sally port where all the blizzard snow was packed in it.and had melted Barros never went to the sallyport. The photos and videos were taken 8 hours before her parents took her SUV to their house 40 miles way. CLEARLY show broken tailight compared to left side tailight HOURS before police took SUV.

Sert team started shoveling a 3 ft snow bank at 5:20, with several police, and a news crew filming. First pieces were found about 5:30. SUV was still being towed to Canton, all on dash cam video. Also found was his sneaker , hat and straw from drink Karen said he took from her car when he exited. Several pieces were found as the snow melted. This was one of the worst blizzard in Canton history with over 24" and snow drifts over 3'.

Tech stream data from her SUV recorded it went 34' forward, slammed into reverse 80+' . with a pedestrian strike. Timestamp correlated with GPS and health app on Johnny's phone. Johnny died 17 seconds after exiting her SUV.

Johnny NEVER entered the house. Karen hit him and left him to DIE in the blizzard.

The 12 jurors and alternatives clearly disagree. Almost all were interviewed and said they believed she was innocent, not merely Not Guilty. There is an avalanche of evidence proving that John O'keefe entered the house. But in the second trial the lawyers focus was narrowed to just meeting the low bar of "beyond a reasonable doubt"
You still continue to avoid explaing how a impact with a SUV causes scratches without leaving any bruises.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by ithos

The 12 jurors and alternatives clearly disagree. Almost all were interviewed and said they believed she was innocent, not merely Not Guilty. There is an avalanche of evidence proving that John O'keefe entered the house. But in the second trial the lawyers focus was narrowed to just meeting the low bar of "beyond a reasonable doubt"
You still continue to avoid explaing how a impact with a SUV causes scratches without leaving any bruises.

The Karen Reed trial still gets at least an hour of TV coverage, every night in Boston. Her lawyers were being interviewed tonight.

It's clear the Prosecution was out classed, despite spending $1,000,000+, just for the "heavy hitter" (Hank Brennan) they brought in. Such spending is needed, when you have a case, based on facts and evidence.

One issue her defense attorneys both brought up, was the issue of Read being "over charged". If O'Keefe wasn't a Boston Police Officer, she would have been charged with Vehicular Homicide and made a deal. The Prosecutors bit off way more than they could chew and they paid for it.

As for Aiden, I don't always like his approach, but I typically agree with his targets. I was personally involved with one of his cause célèbres and he's relentless at digging up the truth and trying to help level the playing field.