Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Here we go. Algor mortis. Body temperature as relates to hypothermia. Hope AJ comes back to that.

---

Welp, never mind to my first comment.

---

What I was going towards with the CW's timeline:

• phone temperature (which I don't consider as anything more than corroborative)
• severity of injuries to skull, incapacitation and then death following the blow
• medical evidence from the body, lividity, rigor mortis, algor mortis
• estimated time of death

CW has not provided a medical estimated time of death.

aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Here we go. Algor mortis. Body temperature as relates to hypothermia. Hope AJ comes back to that.

---

Welp, never mind to my first comment.

---

What I was going towards with the CW's timeline:

• phone temperature (which I don't consider as anything more than corroborative)
• severity of injuries to skull, incapacitation and then death following the blow
• medical evidence from the body, lividity, rigor mortis, algor mortis
• estimated time of death

CW has not provided a medical estimated time of death.

---

Yeah, the medics didnt check temp at scene, so we only have the 80 degrees at the hospital AFTER they warmed him up.

The phone temp is interesting to me because it drops from 80s to in the 40s within an hour, then stays in the 40s for 5 hours. That suggests to me that it was in a place that was in the 40s... like a garage or the stairs of a basement.

Her testimony will probably clear up a lot of the other thoughts you have.

She's allowed to get into the animal bite evidence?

Quote:

---

Yeah, the medics didnt check temp at scene, so we only have the 80 degrees at the hospital AFTER they warmed him up.

---

Precisely.

Had he have been dead, lightly dressed, out in the snow, temperatures in the teens with a considerable wind chill from blizzard conditions, his body temp would have been lower much much lower than 80 degrees.

So again, the CW's timeline is directly affected discrediting their theory of the case.

AgLiving06 said:

---

She's allowed to get into the animal bite evidence?

---

From Jackson's motions this morning, Jackson badgered Corrupt Cannone until she let her say the wounds are consistent with animal bites, but can't say dogs. And Jackson had to lay foundation

Guitarsoup said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

She's allowed to get into the animal bite evidence?

---

From Jackson's motions this morning, Jackson badgered Corrupt Cannone until she let her say the wounds are consistent with animal bites, but can't say dogs. And Jackson had to lay foundation

---

And when she says "canine" she is referring to the tooth name, not the animal.

Premortem versus post mortem.

Injuries to John's arm were premortem, is her assessment.

The prosecution case is being methodically decimated by expert medical testimony from Drs. Scordi-Bello, Laposata and Russell, supported by the opinions of Drs. Wolfe and Rentschler. The prosecution has nothing to challenge them. How is the prosecution eliminating reasonable…

— Bederow Law (@Bederowlaw) June 10, 2025

apparently nothing opens the door to dog bite evidence in this court, even mentioning dog bite analysis conducted by the expert who is precluded from discussing dog bite evidence.

— Bederow Law (@Bederowlaw) June 10, 2025

And Roll Credits:

Laposata testifies that in her experience, O'Keefe's right arm injuries are "very much" consistent with an animal bite or claw mark. #WBZ

— Kristina Rex (@KristinaRex) June 10, 2025

So the victim enters the house while the defendant drives away. He gets into a fist fight and the home owners dog takes sides and attacks. He loses balance from dealing with two attackers, falls, and slowly dies. They probably rendered some aid - would there be any evidence of that, who knows. All present know they have to cover for the home owner and immediately plan what to do with the body.

Quite plausible, almost like an episode of Hitchcock Presents.

Jury has to be wondering why the subject of animal bites is such a touchy subject for the CW. Just emphasizes it more that there is a real issue whether John was ever hit by a car at all. And when the jury gets into that questioning mindset, bringing Welcher back to redirect them to the CW's theory of a car collision? He's not that strong of a witness to do that.

aggiehawg said:

---

Jury has to be wondering why the subject of animal bites is such a touchy subject for the CW. Just emphasizes it more that there is a real issue whether John was ever hit by a car at all. And when the jury gets into that questioning mindset, bringing Welcher back to redirect them to the CW's theory of a car collision? He's not that strong of a witness to do that.

---

Also remember that the first jury, according to Ronnie, were unanimous that the arm wounds were dog bites. Even the ex cop foreman said they were dog bites.

Yep and they could have claimed self defense and possibly not charged since they are cops. But NOooo, they have to try and put an innocent lady in prison.

Rocky Rider said:

---

Yep and they could have claimed self defense and possibly not charged since they are cops. But NOooo, they have to try and put an innocent lady in prison.

---

I think their original plan was to blame a snowplow. Then when Karen broke her taillight on John's Traverse, Jen McCabe called an audible.

Lucky would have been in jail for year at this point and he was a close friend of the Alberts.

It is ridiculous to me that the ME's office did not X-ray the body before the internal autopsy. Is that the implication here? There were no X-rays? When there was a question of a collision with a car?

Quite unusual, in my view.

aggiehawg said:

---

It is ridiculous to me that the ME's office did not X-ray the body before the internal autopsy. Is that the implication here? There were no X-rays? When there was a question of a collision with a car?

Quite unusual, in my view.

---

Do we know that Proctor said there was a collision with a car prior to the autopsy? We know Proctor wasn't there. And we know that they tried to talk her into it being a car collision after it.

Dr. S-B and every other medical examiner would look at John's wounds and think there was absolutely no chance at a vehicle impact.

Rocky Rider said:

---

Yep and they could have claimed self defense and possibly not charged since they are cops. But NOooo, they have to try and put an innocent lady in prison.

---

Self defense? Doubtful. John was invited to that house party. John was not showing bellicosity towards anyone while at the Waterfall, Higgins was.

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

It is ridiculous to me that the ME's office did not X-ray the body before the internal autopsy. Is that the implication here? There were no X-rays? When there was a question of a collision with a car?

Quite unusual, in my view.

---

Do we know that Proctor said there was a collision with a car prior to the autopsy? We know Proctor wasn't there. And we know that they tried to talk her into it being a car collision after it.

Dr. S-B and every other medical examiner would look at John's wounds and think there was absolutely no chance at a vehicle impact.

---

Timing of when decision to take Karen's car versus when the autopsy was conducted and which MA state troopers were present at the autopsy. My spidey senses tell me that theory was relayed to Dr. S-B's staff if not directly to her. And I do recall her testimony that members of her team were in contact with the MA State Police before, during and after the actual autopsy was conducted.

Watching EDB. She said that butt dials have not been brought up in evidence and cannot ve brought up in closing.

aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

It is ridiculous to me that the ME's office did not X-ray the body before the internal autopsy. Is that the implication here? There were no X-rays? When there was a question of a collision with a car?

Quite unusual, in my view.

---

Do we know that Proctor said there was a collision with a car prior to the autopsy? We know Proctor wasn't there. And we know that they tried to talk her into it being a car collision after it.

Dr. S-B and every other medical examiner would look at John's wounds and think there was absolutely no chance at a vehicle impact.

---

Timing of when decision to take Karen's car versus when the autopsy was conducted and which MA state troopers were present at the autopsy. My spidey senses tell me that theory was relayed to Dr. S-B's staff if not directly to her. And I do recall her testimony that members of her team were in contact with the MA State Police before, during and after the actual autopsy was conducted.

---

Yeah, I think they probably said stuff to her before hand. She obviously should have done the x-rays. But I dont know if it is in evidence.

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Watching EDB. She said that butt dials have not been brought up in evidence and cannot ve brought up in closing.

---

Yeah, that is correct. I don't think it matters that much. First jury thought of all that as a distraction.

It is super suspicious, but the last jury didnt care at all.

I think the most important part is the medical data, because even the CW's witnesses support the defense claims. And the only person that really refutes it is Jud Welcher, who got $400k to refute it and relied on Shanon Burgess for data. That is easy to hammer home in closing.

Quote:

---

But I dont know if it is in evidence.

---

Welcher said he never saw any x-rays that were taken of John's body. he said it as part of being evasive about answering a question by the defense on cross but he said it. I noted it to myself at the time. Does that mean there are no x-rays? Or that he just didn't review them. Thought that was odd at the time.

OTOH, the dissections of the legs to look for medical signs within the dermis, epidermis, muscle tissue and bones was done for the precise reason of a car impact. So that dissection may have been an afterthought when Dr. S-B was having trouble reaching a manner of death conclusion.

I love Alessi but I think Jackson is doing better with Wolfe and LaPosada because he is more relatable and doesnt get buried in the weeds.

aggiehawg said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

Yep and they could have claimed self defense and possibly not charged since they are cops. But NOooo, they have to try and put an innocent lady in prison.

---

Self defense? Doubtful. John was invited to that house party. John was not showing bellicosity towards anyone while at the Waterfall, Higgins was.

---

I'm opening the door wide since the Albert's, McCabes, and Higgins are bold face liars. Say JOK arrives at the house, calls out Higgins for trying to show him up in front of Karen at the Waterfall. JOK becomes the aggressor, dog gets excited and joins in, Albert punches JOK trying to end the fight, and JOK falls and hits his head. They were all drunk and things got out of hand.

So now they did take x-rays? Why did they have to go down the rabbit holes that there weren't? Welcher just effed up saying there were absent, I guess.

Guitarsoup said:

---

I love Alessi but I think Jackson is doing better with Wolfe and LaPosada because he is more relatable and doesnt get buried in the weeds.

---

Alessi reminds me of George McFly...

All of her "patients" are dead people. She's a pathologist.

Obligatory.

Brennan is annoying.

Brennan is being so goofy on this. Her specialty is not saving people because they are already dead before they come before her.

I love the way she is pushing back on Brennan in her own "Your an idiot" way.

So what difference does it make whether John would have survived had he received immediate medical attention at a Level One Trauma Center.

Looked but cannot find where Good Samaritan in Canton is a Level One Trauma Center.

He's arguing results without understanding process and she's knowledgeable about process and the ability to determine results.

Why does Brennan keep pushing on the grass. That's not a winning battle and he's basically proving the defense case.

duck79 said:

---

Why does Brennan keep pushing on the grass. That's not a winning battle and he's basically proving the defense case.

---

Because they need to explain the head wound to the back of the skull as something other than a car impact. So if the car didn't cause it, the ground surface had to be hard enough to cause that severe of an injury.

So where did Albert move to? Is he no longer with the CPD? I know the guy who probably killed O'Keefe moved to Main I believe.

vwbug said:

---

So where did Albert move to? Is he no longer with the CPD? I know the guy who probably killed O'Keefe moved to Main I believe.

---

Albert was/is a Boston cop, same as John, not a Canton PD officer.