Beyond The Horizon

ICYMI: Karen Read, The Autopsy Photos And Transparency

The Karen Read trial is set to kick off today and there are still many, many questions that must be answered and a lot of that is due to the lack of transparancy that we have seen from the authorities due to several factors, such as Mass. state law when it comes to autopsy results being released.

Due to the lack of transparancy, a fertile ground has developed for all sorts of conspiracy theories to thrive and have led to a circus like atmosphere.

So, how does a lack of transparancy cause chaos?

Transparency in criminal trials serves multiple vital purposes in ensuring justice is fair, impartial, and accountable. Here's why it's crucial:

Public Confidence: Transparency fosters trust in the judicial system. When proceedings are open to the public, it demonstrates that justice is being administered fairly and impartially. Citizens are more likely to have faith in the outcomes of trials when they can observe the process.
Accountability: Openness holds both the judiciary and law enforcement accountable for their actions. When trials are transparent, it becomes more difficult for authorities to abuse power or engage in corrupt practices. Knowing that their actions are subject to public scrutiny can act as a deterrent against misconduct.
Preventing Injustice: Transparency helps prevent miscarriages of justice. When trials are conducted in the open, it allows for greater scrutiny of evidence, procedures, and decisions. This scrutiny can help identify errors or biases that may have otherwise gone unnoticed, potentially preventing wrongful convictions.
Education and Understanding: Open trials provide an educational opportunity for the public to understand the legal process. By witnessing courtroom procedures firsthand, citizens can gain insight into how the law operates and how decisions are made. This promotes civic engagement and a better-informed citizenry.
Deterrence of Conspiracy Theories: When the state operates with transparency, there's less room for speculation and conspiracy theories to take hold. When information is withheld or proceedings are conducted in secret, it can fuel mistrust and skepticism. Conspiracy theories often thrive in environments where there is a perceived lack of transparency or accountability.

A lack of transparency from the state can indeed fuel conspiracy theories and rumors for several reasons:

Speculation: When information is not readily available, people may speculate about what is being concealed and why. This speculation can give rise to unfounded theories and rumors as individuals attempt to fill in the gaps with their own interpretations.
Mistrust: A lack of transparency erodes trust in the authorities and the judicial system. When people feel that information is being withheld or manipulated, they are more likely to question the legitimacy of official explanations and entertain alternative, often more sensational, narratives.
Confirmation Bias: In the absence of transparent information, individuals may be more inclined to believe information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs or suspicions, even if it lacks evidence or credibility. This confirmation bias can contribute to the spread of conspiracy theories.
Credibility of Institutions: When institutions fail to operate transparently, their credibility is undermined. This loss of credibility can make people more receptive to alternative explanations, including conspiracy theories, which purport to offer hidden truths that mainstream institutions are unwilling or unable to provide.

(commercial at 11:52)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

source:

Duration:: 17m
Broadcast on:: 01 Jul 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

Hey, it is Ryan Seacrest. There's something so thrilling about playing Chumba Casino. Maybe it's the simple reminder that with a little luck, anything is possible. Chumbak Casino.com has hundreds of social casino style games to choose from with new game releases each week. Play for free anytime, anywhere, for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Join me in the fun. Sign up now at Chumbak Casino.com. Sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary. VGW Group, void where prohibited by law, 18 plus terms and conditions apply. What's up, everyone? And welcome back to the program. The Karen Read Trial is set to kick off today in earnest with opening statements. And for my money, this can't happen soon enough. I've never seen more people afflicted with main character syndrome than I have in this case. Now we've been covering this sort of thing for, oh, I don't know, five years now. And we've covered some wild stuff here on the podcast. But it's never a good idea to try and insert yourself into the middle of something and make yourself the main character. I think a lot of people have lost the plot here. We have a dead man, Mr. O'Keefe. And there's no answers as of yet as to who killed him. Now I'm not going to say that Karen reads guilty. I don't know. I think that there's a lot here that has to be covered in this trial. And there's a lot that the prosecution is going to have to prove. But in the vast majority of these cases, whenever somebody has the third party kind of defense, where they say somebody else did it, it wasn't them, it's very difficult for the jury and the court to accept that. You're going to have to bring a little more to the table, right? You can't just say that. You're going to now have to prove that in court. You're going to have to back up everything you're saying in front of the jury. And the last thing you want is the jury to think you're some kind of BS artist, right? Probably not the best look for the jury. So I'm very interested to see how Karen reads team attempts to prove that there was a third party that was responsible for this murder. It's going to be very, very interesting to see how this all plays out. So today, we have an article from the Boston Globe to get us prepared for these opening statements to kick off and the headline. A key piece of the Karen Reed case remains a mystery due to mass law, the autopsy report. This article was authored by Sean Cotter. There are the photographs that launched 1,000 theories. The body of John O'Keefe, the former Boston police officer found dead in a snowstorm in January 2022, lying on an autopsy table, scrapes and scratches covering his arms, swelling around his eyes. And according to the medical examiner and those court documents we've been going through, that was because he fell and hit his head. And that's what caused all of the swelling around his eyes, the blood to start the pool, and all of the rest of the issues that we saw as far as the injury sustained to Mr. O'Keefe. These photos, according to the supporters of Karen Reed, the woman accused of murdering O'Keefe are evidence that the prosecution's claims she backed her car into him and left him for dead are wrong. The autopsy photos made public only because Reed's defense lawyers included them in a court filing suggest that Reed is the victim of a massive police coverup. Her supporters say and that John O'Keefe actually was beaten by others and possibly attacked by the dog who lived on the property where the body was found. And all of that, as far as if a dog bit him, if there was any kind of DNA from an animal or whatever, that should all be included in these reports. And I think we're gonna get a whole lot more about what's in those reports, obviously, because the trial's about to kick off. So we're gonna learn everything that the prosecution has. Remember, when we're talking about something like this, the prosecution isn't gonna show their whole hand. So they have things that they keep in reserve. And even when they're going to get, say, an affidavit, a probable cause affidavit or an arrest warrant, they only give enough to get the judge to sign off on it. They're not gonna give out all of their information to the defense. They're not gonna just put it all in court documentation for the defense and their litigation specialists to dig through. So there's always a lot more going on behind the scenes. Does that mean they have a slam dunk here and Karen reads guilty? No, it does not. But it's always a good idea to keep in mind that they always have stuff in reserve. And we haven't seen all of the evidence yet, one way or the other. It was these photos that led Lisa Pierce to protest on Reed's behalf outside Norfolk Superior Court during a recent hearing. Next to her, another woman held a sign that read, "Where's Chloe?" The dog in question. One social media profile invoked the OJ Simpson case in summing up the importance of what Reed supporters believe the autopsy photos reveal. If the arm was bit, you must acquit. Well, yeah, look, if there's a dog bite on this dude, that's going to cause all kinds of problems for the prosecution. There is no doubt about it. Because remember, they're saying that he was hit by a car. There's no talk about a dog biting him. So if there's evidence of that, and I'm guessing there would be, right, then it's going to be very difficult for the prosecution. The question is, has that evidence been found? Is there some sort of documentation, some sort of forensic test that tells us that a dog bit Mr. O'Keefe? So far, I haven't seen anything to that effect. Now, does that mean it doesn't exist? Absolutely not. Just as far as what I have seen in those court documents, there's nothing saying that a dog bit him. While the photos were made public by the defense, the full autopsy report providing context, including the medical examiner's official conclusions and analysis of O'Keefe's injuries remain shielded from release by state law. Some experts say Reed's case is a perfect example of why these documents should be public, as they are in several other states. In their absence, speculation fills the void, and it creates fertile ground for people to come up with all kinds of BS. Every single time there's something of note that takes place, as far as a high profile murder, there's always people that fill the space with a bunch of BS. And unfortunately, there's a bunch of people that always believe it. You know, it's one thing to have an opinion. It's another thing to try and push that opinion as fact, when you don't have anything to back it up. And there's a lot of people that do that. They just jumped at conclusions. You take a look at what happened up in Moscow, forget it. In the aftermath of that, we were hearing about cartels, we're hearing about all kinds of crazy ass theories, and none of them obviously were even close to being true. But that didn't prevent all of the grifters and all of the scumbags from trying to profit, right? Showing up, telling people that they're a psychic, they know that a professor from Idaho killed these kids, you know, the whole thing. And the crazy part is people buy into it. They continue to follow these people, even though they're wrong every single time. But when the authorities don't engage in transparency, this is exactly what it leads to. And there's no doubt there are some of that going on here in the Karen Reed case. It's one thing to be passionate about something. It's another thing to try and insert yourself where you don't belong. Massachusetts has a reputation for being one of the most secretive states in the country for open records law, said Jeffrey Pyle, a Boston attorney who focuses on First Amendment issues. Courts are making decisions based on documents that the public can't see. And this is a big issue that I have as well. I think that there should be transparency in the court. I think that the court and the judge and the system itself should do everything they possibly can to make sure that things are transparent. Because if not, it really causes a lot of problems. It's not like the old days, right? Where you have the enquirer running around or something like that, everybody in their mother is a quote unquote journalist now. And they show up to these events and they have people that support them. They're giving the money and it just perpetuates their bullshit, right? But to act like a lot of that isn't fertilized by the authorities not being transparent is ignoring one of the biggest factors in these conspiracy theories. And that's why it's super important in my opinion that we have transparency in the courtroom and within the system. Because when people are armed with facts, they don't have to go out and look for BS. He said transparency is key to ensuring oversight of judges and the court process in general, including during the many decisions around evidence and other motions that lead up to a trial. If the public cannot see the documents that judges rely on in the course of making decisions, the public cannot make decisions on whether the judges' decisions are correct. Pile said, and remember our system is set up for us to have that transparency. And it seems like a lot of these courts, they'll do anything in their power to avoid transparency. Like gag orders in every single case these days, is that really necessary? Every single case needs a gag order, seems like everything we talk about has one. And then you'll get people who cry about conspiracy theory. Well, I get it, it's annoying as hell. And certainly a lot of BS to wade through, but you can't just blame the people. You got to blame the authorities who aren't giving out the proper information. And then of course, there's a lot of people that don't understand that there's a lot to be learned from the court documents themselves. So people don't make that leap. In fact, people don't even know where to find these court documents half the time. Never mind, know what's in them. Amid the flurry of filings in court and rampant speculation outside of it, all this has been available to the public about O'Keefe's death, are sparsely filled out death certificate and snippets and prosecution summaries of the full autopsy report. And we've been going through the court documents that are available, and it's basically all the prosecution's narrative. So that's all we've had to go on. And now that the trial is getting ready to start, we'll be able to hear from Karen Reid's side and we'll be able to ascertain a little bit more about what their strategy is going to be. In court filings, the prosecution has summarized what it says is grand jury testimony from Dr. Ireni Scordy-Bello of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Scordy-Bello said O'Keefe suffered significant blunt force trauma before becoming hyperthermic, head injuries likely to the back of his skull, probably incapacitated him. Scordy-Bello said and caused swelling around his eyes. The district attorney's office wrote, "The doctor saw no signs of him being involved in a fight. The DA's office wrote, "The defense has used different parts of the report to further their theories that Reid is being framed, and that O'Keefe was beaten on the property of fellow Boston police officer Brian Albert, outside of which his body was found and left to die." Defense attorney Alan Jackson at one point held up enlarged autopsy photos in court as he suggested that the wounds on O'Keefe's arms are dog bites and that the swelling on O'Keefe's face is from a beating. The defense submitted a report from its own expert, forensic pathologist Dr. Frank Sheridan of California, but that document is under seal, and Sheridan, who is listed as a possible witness in Reid's trial, could not be reached for comment, an attorney for Reid declined to comment. So look, we haven't seen any of the counter by Karen Reid, so let's just keep that in mind, right? Now I'm not saying that it's going to change the world or it's going to shake people off of their perch, but it's a good idea to see all the evidence when we're talking about a murder case, because let's not act like the prosecution hasn't made mistakes before, they most certainly have. So I don't just discount things out of hand, right? I don't just say, well, Karen Reid's lying, she's guilty. For me, it's more of a, let's see the evidence. And I haven't seen the affidavit or anything like that, so all we have heard are the narratives and the reports that have been filed by the prosecution. And granted, it doesn't look good for Karen Reid, right? Not at all, but let's see what she has to say. And thankfully, we're not going to have to wait much longer. - Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest, life comes at you fast, which is why it's important to find some time to relax a little you time. Enter Chumba Casino with no download required. You can jump on anytime, anywhere for the chance to redeem some serious prizes. So treat yourself with Chumba Casino and play over 100 online casino style games all for free. Go to ChumbaCasino.com to collect your free welcome bonus. Sponsored by Chumba Casino, no purchase necessary. VGW Group, void where prohibited by law. 18 plus terms and conditions apply. - The Globe's request to obtain O'Keefe's autopsy report under the Massachusetts Open Records Law were denied. A spokesperson for the executive office of public safety and security cited state law that autopsy reports are not public record. The Norfolk DA's office is forbidden from releasing the report spokesperson, David Trob, sent a response to the Globe's request for the document. He said the office provided the report to the defense through the discovery process and that more information will come out during Reid's trial in which opening arguments will begin on Monday after five days of jury selection. The trial, the judge told prospective jurors could last as long as eight weeks. The examination and cross-examination of the medical examiner will be where you get your answers. Trob said, "In Massachusetts, the state office of the chief medical examiner conducts autopsies on people who die in violence, suspicious or unexplained circumstances. Death certificates are public record in Massachusetts but contain much less information than the full report. O'Keefe's filed with the clerk's office in Canton says he died from blunt impact injuries to the head and hypothermia, but includes no elaboration by Scordy Bello, who certified it. The manner of death is listed as could not be determined. Other states offer more transparency. Autopsy reports are typically considered public records in several states, including Alabama, Colorado, California and Florida, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which charts the documents of eligibility. The organization says other states, including the rest of New England, typically do not allow autopsy reports to be released to the public. Dr. Samantha Halsey, an atomic pathologist who practices in Alabama said she was surprised to hear reports were not public in all states the way they are in hers. She said that such a document wouldn't be very useful to a layman. The dense jargon-heavy report is in something a non-medical professional could read over lunch and draw firm conclusions about, she said. If someone has the actual report, they have what came out of the horse's mouth, not secondary, not tertiary, not hearsay, said Halsey, who conducts private autopsies, but on the other hand, who's examining it? Testimony also might bring much clarity, she said, because you can have one doctor paid to say this and one doctor paid to say that. And that's the battle of the experts, right? We see that in every single trial. It doesn't matter what trial it is, there's always a battle of the experts. And this trial is not going to be any different. Justin Silverman, executive director of the New England First Amendment Coalition, noted the high public interest in this case amid the allegations of police wrongdoing. If there is a merit to such claims, it's important to the public to find out. And it's just as important if nothing went wrong, he said, that trust is restored. Anytime you have questions about those in government and how they're acting and whether they might be involved in an individual's death, the public interest is getting more information about their death increases significantly, Silverman said. These autopsy reports might provide answers to these types of questions. Well, be that as it may, we're gonna get all the answers that we can take very soon. And that's because the trial is kicking off today. And that means all the BS goes out the window and it's time to provide some evidence. So let's see where this evidence leads us and let's see how this all ends up. And what we'll do is we'll recap each day like we have done for the other trials that we've covered and we'll see what's presented and we'll see how it all goes. Because unlike a lot of the other cases that we talk about, there's just not enough information out there yet for me to really come to a conclusion one way or the other. So it's gonna be interesting to see how this all breaks and it's gonna be real interesting to see what sort of evidence Karen Reed and her experts present to the court. But until then, that's gonna do it for this one. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box. - Hey, there's Ryan Seacrest here. Everybody needs some variety in life. That's what I love about Chumba Casino. They know how to keep things fresh and exciting. All their games are free to play. Like Spin Slots, Bingo and Solitaire. You can claim free daily login bonuses too. And they release new games every week. So spice things up with Chumba Casino.com now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Sponsored by Chumba Casino. No purchase necessary. VGW Group. Void where prohibited by law. 18 plus terms and conditions apply.